Properties remain incomplete, landscaping leaves a lot to be desired and roads wait for Tarmac.

Not surprisingly, properties remain unsold and given the current financial climate it remains to be seen how those who organised the shambles will repay the reputed cost of £6Million funded mainly by the long suffering tax payer.

We are now told a “sales drive” will take place later this year – at what cost and who is going to pay?

Quite frankly, those who promoted the benefits of the event should be jailed. Little concern was demonstrated as the costs of the fiasco rocketed and this at a time that the Directors of Highland Council were fully aware that the council had massively overspent and was largely running out of control.

The term “Development at any Cost” springs to mind. The NIMBY’S who insisted that the location was suitable and would benefit the region should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves – will they all be eventually taken to court? Only time will tell, but one thing is certain, when the full financial facts are forced out the information will generate massive criticism.

Those who campaigned against the event have proven to be very accurate with their thoughts about the issue, yet still Susan Torrance and her team of supporters are in denial.

The only winner is Tulloch Homes, reported to have made a cool £500,000 profit on the sale of the land involved to Highland Housing Alliance!

Earlier this year, it emerged that taxpayers handed Inverness building firm Tulloch Homes a profit when land on the outskirts of the city was sold to the organisers of the fair.

Tulloch Homes bought around 40 acres of agricultural land at Balvonie Braes for £850,000 and sold it with one extra acre nine months later to the council-funded Highland Housing Alliance for £1,350,000.

Barrie Haycock, chairman of Planning Watch UK, said he was outraged by the way the Balvonie Braes project had been handled.

“I think the whole affair is a complete disgrace and indicates the contempt which the Scottish Government and the Highland Council demonstrate to the community and the planning process in general,” he said.

It transpired hundreds of brochures — designed to attract government support — had to be destroyed because they contained inaccurate information relating to community facilities claimed to be in place, but not provided at Milton of Leys.

This latest twist has prompted furious opponents to demand sackings at the highest management level.

Editor

Housing Expo to mount sales drive in bid to recoup £6m

Published:  18 January, 2011, Inverness Courier

ORGANISERS of Scotland’s Housing Expo are preparing for a major event to help boost the sale of 24-eco homes so that £6 million of public money can be repaid.

Highland Housing Alliance, which led the expo project, has a deadline of April 2012 to sell the houses – some worth in excess of £300,000 – which are still on the market five months after the event closed.

The Expo, a development of 52 homes at Balvonie Braes in Inverness, showcasing sustainable and energy efficient design, was open to the public throughout August last year and attracted more than 30,000 visitors.

Yesterday it was revealed only one of the 24 homes built by the alliance has been sold but the organisation’s chief executive Susan Torrance is unperturbed.

Cash from each sale is to be returned to the public purse as part of an agreement with the Scottish Government, which underwrote the controversial housing scheme with £6 million of taxpayer’s money.

As part of the deal, if the alliance fails to sell the homes, they will be converted to affordable housing either through low-cost ownership or affordable rented accommodation.

Mrs Torrance remains confident all the homes will sell by the time the deadline comes around.

“I would be extremely surprised if it takes longer than 18 months,” she said.

“Not a lot of new houses are being built but people are still looking for new homes.”

Whilst sales have been slow she revealed there have been expressions of interest from buyers in all the homes with some proving more popular than others.

She went on to reveal plans for a major event in April which would properly launch and market the expo homes for sale.

Scotland’s Housing Expo at the city’s Balvonie Braes where 24 eco-homes remain unsold. Gary Anthony

The alliance is waiting until spring because some work, such as laying roads and landscaping, is still to take place and it wants the site to be completely finished.

Prolonged snow and ice over recent weeks has caused some delays to the work schedule.

“What we want to do is really show off the houses to their best in April when all the landscaping is complete,” said Mrs Torrance, explaining until recently some of the houses also still required work.

Ideas for the April launch, which will form part of the alliance’s marketing strategy, include staging a farmer’s market, fashion show, music event and competition giveaways at the site.

Mrs Torrance also revealed plans were in the pipeline to host a professionals’ day on 18th March for architects, developers and other interested parties who may have missed the exhibition in August.

“Since the expo we have had umpteen folk wanting to see around the site,” she said.

“This will be the last chance for folk to see around the houses.”

The remainder of the expo development is made up of a further 20 affordable homes, built for local housing associations, and eight private houses funded directly by developers to the tune of £2.3 million.

Albyn Housing Society has sold 10 of its 11 homes and O’Brien and Robertson are understood to have sold each of their plots.

Link to original article

Courier reader comments:

Wee jamie
The Expo was a scam from the very start.
I visited with an architect. His opinion – Houses – Rubbish.

Jack
The Expo site is never going to feel like a proper housing estate. The houses are too close together

Yesterday, 16:31:52

Mmm
I bought one of the Albyn houses and feel very lucky. It’s very energy efficient and a great opportunity for myself and partner to get on the property ladder in such difficult times. The site is far from complete and it does feel like we’re living in a show room. We have ‘visitors’ constantly peering through our windows which has become very tiresome. I don’t think people realise that there are families living on site now.

Today, 14:17:39

Stewie
It looks like the Expo is being EXPOsed as a bad idea!

Today, 09:14:25

Be specific
“Umpteen”?. Such a comment is almost as much use as the imaginary 30,000 plus figure that those responsible for this shambles are still touting. Any chance of some ACTUAL accounts related to the none Common Good Fund income generated before April? Take away the £60,000 grant and the double counted free children used to inflate the numbers and the Expo is exposed as a joke.

Today, 09:12:22

Jack
Prepare to be discussing this in 18 months. The public will NOT take out mortgages to purchase experiemental houses on a cramped experimental estate which will contain a number of social housing units. The resale value of these egotistical follies is being indicated by the fact that the only one sold to date was bought by someone with a financial involvement in the project.

Yesterday, 22:26:48

Another MoL Resident
To recover £6M they would need to average £222,222 PROFIT on each of the 27 houses to recoup the monies spent. Clearly the cost of construction and the running of the event has to be covered.
Will the public purse see all its money back?

Yesterday, 22:11:23

James
I wish Mrs Torrance the best of luck in selling these houses, but with £300,000 a person could buy a very nice house in Crown or down by the river, so it’s difficult to see how these houses at Balvonie will take preference to such houses which are also on the market, despite what Susan Torrance says. Hopefully, for the sake of the public purse, the properties sell.

Yesterday, 21:34:11

Denise
This is a disgrace of monumental proportions.

Yesterday, 18:41:21

Anon
Watch for the begging bowl going to the Common Good Fund once more.

Yesterday, 12:17:42

M.O.L. Resident.
Were all these extra openings and events part of the original plans for the Housing Expo? Or are we now expected to suffer more disruption with visitors parking on the side of the roads or better yet, on the actual pavements without any say at all. I remember the words “No extended opening” being used at the end of the actual show, this sounds very much to me like the Housing Expo is being reopened. Lets hope they can sell some of the houses and pay the taxpayers back the £6 million they owe.

Yesterday, 08:37:42

BMac
“…Yesterday it was revealed only one of the 24 homes built by the alliance has been sold but the organisation’s chief executive Susan Torrance is unperturbed…”It’s wonderful how unconcerned one can be when it’s public money.

Yesterday, 00:44:27

Bogbain
Good Luck! to Ms Torrance with her marketing scheme. If it is half as good as the one that she executed for David Sutherland whereby all the new home builders had to contribute to the cost of his Milton of Leys link road then her latest scheme should land in clover.
For the uninitiated. Mr Sutherland’s Tulloch builders could not build more than 600 homes at Milton of Leys without building a new link road. Part of a planning condition. Enter Susan Torrance, ex Tulloch director who fronted the housing fair development for the benefit of Suds. Suds had bought the Balvonie farm fields for way above the agricultural rate in the belief that  HC planners would nod another development through the system.
But up sprang disenchanted Milton of Leys Tulloch Home buyers who joined forces with Bogbain and exposed anomalies in the Highland Council planners system.A new Highland Council planning committee was formed which owed Suds no favours, so that the whole housing fair farce got a rough ride in the media.
Can Susan now explain to taxpayers just how much each new housebuilder has had to contribute to the cost of Tulloch’s new Milton of Leys link road. The question has been asked many times before but Susan and Suds remain silent. And why not? Nice little bit of Inverness business.

2 days ago, 17:53:24

laxdale
one word albatross

Yesterday, 20:33:39

The Cairngorms National Park is the largest park in BritainThe Cairngorms National Park Authority (CNPA) is to consider a proposal to create a new community on the outskirts of Aviemore.

Park officials have recommended that the CNPA’s planning committee approves the project in principle.

Rothiemurchus Estate’s project would see 1,500 homes and business and community facilities built in phases at An Camas Mor, close to Coylumbridge.

The CNPA said it would be one of the “biggest developments in a generation”.

The Cairngorms National Park is the largest national park in Britain.

Duncan Bryden, CNPA planning committee convener, said the proposal required a rigorous examination.

He said: “This is the largest and most complex application to come before us – indeed it is the only proposal for a new community in a UK National Park.”

Objectors to the project include Badenoch and Strathspey Conservation Group.

It said the site was home to a large population of slender groundhopper, a rare invertebrate, and other species of wildlife.

The An Camas Mor project team sees the 259-acre (105-hectare) development as a solution to the area’s “chronic shortage” of housing, business and community facilities.

If approved, the scheme would be built in phases and completed by 2027.

Link to original BBC article

Some nine years after the first property was built on the large development, residents are still waiting for their first real amenity facility following years of campaigning. A solitary post box has been featured in a number of press articles and underpins the failure of Highland Council to build integrated serviced communities.

Properties were sold on the basis of provision of a Primary School, shops and other essential services.
Property owners who live on the periphery of Inverness have been forced, until recently, to drive three miles to get a bottle of milk or loaf of bread, yet the developer has seemed determined to achieve a residential planning precedent on  land reserved for community purposes

Communities across the greater Inverness region are questioning the failure of Highland Council to provide jobs and infrastructure within new development after development covering thousands of new homes.

Homes for Heroes Ltd was set up on 15th Oct 2008 by Ken McMillan & Ewan McAuley.
The initial aim was to procure affordable housing for members of the Armed Forces while they are still serving.
The initiative is aimed at providing a home for when the serviceman actually leaves the service and so preventing them from being subjected to the “mercy of Council waiting lists”

A whole lot different to what Mr Sutherland is portraying when he implies the housing is required to house servicemen with disabilies!

Editor

Gavin Norton, Chair of Milton of Leys Residents Association said:

Residents are desperate to see community facilities at An Inverness development, but have grave concerns that the developer is putting profit above much needed amenity space for this growing community, as well as paying lip service to planning regulations.

“When outline planning permission was given residents expected any residential units on the site to be service flats above shops. Instead we have been bombarded with differing indicative housing layouts finally culminating in approx 12 properties being sold under the Homes for Heroes Scheme.”

“As a serviceman myself I fully support the Homes for Heroes scheme, however Milton of Leys is a vast site, and these units can easily be accommodated elsewhere rather than taking up valuable amenity open space”.

“A Nursery is being sought on land outside that zoned for amenity land on Green Open Space, it is clear the developer knows this but wants to press ahead regardless of the planning regulations to the contrary.

“Should permission be given we fear the precedents that would be set by allowing building on Green open space, as well as residential properties in future amenity areas”.

“Milton of Leys has precious few play areas for children, and as a result of reshuffling the site an area of 1.9 acres for play equipment already passed by Highland Council has been compressed into almost half its original size. Once again the community and the children lose out”

“Despite years of consultation and work on forums with elected members regarding what Residents wanted to see on the site it is becoming clear that we will get what we are given and have to be thankful for it”.

“The responsibility lies on Highland Councils Planning department to ensure communities as large as Milton of Leys maximise the little amenity space they have in the best way possible to the benefit of the residents, not the developer”.

Residents are desperate for facilities and it is clear the parties concerned are using that to their advantage.

Residents hit out at Tulloch over their Homes for Heroes ‘ploy’

locals say builders playing emotional card to get scheme support

Published: 03/04/2010

The north’s largest developer has been accused of “playing the emotional card” to try to win support for a housing scheme for disabled and injured service personnel.

Tulloch Homes wants to include 12 properties under the Houses for Heroes scheme in its plans for amenity land at Milton of Leys on the south-east edge of Inverness.

Residents have consistently opposed the Inverness-based firm’s proposals to build houses on the land, which has also been earmarked for a care home, nursery, school and shops.

The latest plans drawn up by Tulloch include houses for armed forces veterans, a move residents claim is a “good ploy” to try to win over opponents and Highland Council.

Milton of Leys Residents Association chairman Gavin Norton said: “All previous incarnations of the plans have been for residential houses for profit, not for Houses for Heroes.

“We think they are playing the emotional card by using Houses for Heroes to garner support for a residential development.”

Residents say they are not opposed to ex-service personnel living in the 600-home development, but are campaigning for the houses to be built elsewhere on the estate.

Tulloch Homes chief executive David Sutherland said he was “taken aback” by the opposition and insisted his firm would “certainly not be backtracking” on its decision to allocate land for Houses for Heroes on the amenity site.

Milton of Leys resident Barrie Haycock, who is chairman of the campaign group Planning Watch, said: “I am supportive of building Houses for Heroes, but the issue in Milton of Leys is, now that the link road has been built, Tulloch can build another 300 properties up here, taking the estate up to the original planning consent of 900 homes.

“Houses for Heroes can be built in these areas. Tulloch is using the emotional playing card with this application.”

The Houses for Heroes scheme was established in 2008 after it emerged that 5,000 ex-service personnel were homeless in Britain.

Mr Sutherland said Houses for Heroes planned to build five homes in a first phase within two years.

He said: “We have donated the site for 12 homes at Milton of Leys to Houses for Heroes out of sympathy for young injured servicemen and women, many with young families.

“I’m completely taken aback that the residents’ association has an objection to us housing these people, who have been wounded or suffered disabilities in the service of their country. They should be very proud to have them in their community. In this respect, I certainly don’t think the view is at all representative of the majority of Milton of Leys residents.

“Locating these homes beside the neighbourhood centre meets the charity’s requirements. People with disabilities need to be close to shops and services as often they cannot drive.”

Read more: http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/1674244?UserKey=#ixzz0k1LWuMdF

If the Government wants to pursue its plans for Heathrow expansion it must now go back to square one and reconsider the entire case for the runway.

The implications of today’s ruling are profound, not just for Heathrow but for airport expansion plans across the UK.  Lord Justice Carnwath ruled that the 2003 Air Transport White Paper – the foundation of expansion plans across the country – is obsolete because it is inconsistent with the Climate Change Act 2008.

The judge expressed real concern over the “hardship caused to the local community by uncertainty” over the third runway. The coalition which brought the successful legal challenge is now calling on the Government to end the uncertainty and scrap the runway plans once and for all.

The judge ruled that:

• If the Government decides to push ahead with the runway project it must now review the climate change implications of Heathrow expansion, the economic case for a third runway, and the issue of how additional passengers would get to a bigger airport.

• The Government’s entire aviation policy must now be reviewed to take into account the implications of the 2008 Climate Change Act. The judge found that “the claimants’ submissions add up, in my view, to a powerful demonstration of the potential significance of developments in climate change policy since the 2003 Air Transport White Paper. They are clearly matters which will need to be taken into account under the new Airports National Policy Statement.”(1)

• On the economic case for Heathrow expansion he would be ‘surprised’ if the recent tripling of the estimated cost to society of emitting carbon did not have ‘a significant effect’ on the economic case for the runway. The judge also said that “it makes no sense to treat the economic case as settled in 2003.”

• On the issue of surface access he said the claimants’ case – that there is no credible plan in place to transport millions of extra passengers to an expanded Heathrow – was ‘justified’. Significantly, he noted that the Government was “unable to provide a convincing answer” in court when it was pressed about over-crowding on the Piccadilly underground line that would result from construction of a third runway.

The judge is now inviting the Government to sign a legally binding undertaking that it will not base future aviation policy solely on its 2003 white paper. A further court hearing is expected to take place next month to examine the Government’s response to the judge’s request. At the same hearing the coalition will seek costs and fully expects to recover those costs from the Government.

Shaun Spiers, Chief Executive of the Campaign to Protect Rural England, said:
“The Government said there could be no argument about the need for a third runway. This was undemocratic and it was wrong.

“We were forced to bring this legal case to give people the right to challenge the expansion of Heathrow. The High Court has now made clear that a fundamental review of aviation policy is needed. This not just a victory for people living around Heathrow or around other airports, it is a victory for everyone who wants a tranquil countryside and a democratic planning system.”

Cllr Ray Puddifoot speaking on behalf of the local councils said:
“This is a spectacular victory for our residents. The Government had been trying to close down debate on the true economic impact of a third runway by presenting it as a done deal.

“Today’s ruling has blown that position apart. The Government just did not want to have to take on board the real consequences of new climate change laws. The judge made it clear the figures just did not add up.

“If after this ministers are still intent on pressing ahead with expansion they will have to go back to the beginning and justify the whole economic case in public. Knowing what we now know about rising carbon costs this is an argument they cannot win.

“The third runway is effectively dead because it cannot survive the proper economic and environmental scrutiny which the Government tried to avoid. As local councils we call on the Prime Minister to do to the decent thing and bury this discredited policy.”
Geraldine Nicholson, Chair of NoTRAG, said:
“As local residents, we now demand that the Government drops all plans for a 3rd runway and sixth terminal at Heathrow so that we can cast off the 8 years of blight and start to rejuvenate our communities.”

Greenpeace executive director John Sauven said:
“This ruling leaves the Government’s Heathrow decision in tatters. Ministers will now have to go back to the drawing board and conduct a broad consultation on key issues where their case is extremely weak. The third runway was already on life support, but with this ruling it’s hard to even find a pulse. This shows that David Cameron and Nick Clegg backed the right horse when they pledged to scrap the third runway, and it makes any Conservative U-turn after the election all but politically impossible.”

David Nussbaum, CEO of WWF-UK, said:
“We are delighted with today’s judgement. It deals a body blow to the third runway, but more than that it makes it clear that the Government’s whole policy of airport expansion must be reviewed in order to bring it into line with the Climate Change Act.

“Today’s landmark ruling has implications that could resonate far wider than the aviation sector. For a judge to tell the Government that it cannot build huge pieces of carbon-intensive infrastructure without considering the long-term consequences is a resounding win in the fight to tackle climate change. It is also a further indication of the need for the UK to make a swift transition to a low carbon economy. WWF would now urge the Government to focus on green investment, encouraging alternative ways of connecting with people wherever possible, such as high speed rail and videoconferencing, rather than relying on carbon-heavy methods such as flying.”

HACAN Chair John Stewart said:
“This is an utterly damning verdict for the Government.  It not only raises very serious concerns about a third runway at Heathrow, it also calls into question the Government’s entire aviation policy.  This really could be the final nail in the coffin for a third runway.”

Martin Harper, the RSPB’s Head of Sustainable Development, said:
“Right from the start, we have argued that building a third runway at a time when we are battling to reduce our carbon emissions made no sense.

“Climate change threatens many species with extinction and we are already seeing its impacts with catastrophic declines in seabird numbers in parts of the North Sea.

“Concerns about climate change are at the heart of today’s judgement. The clear message from the High Court is that Government must now take those concerns into account.”

ENDS

NOTES TO EDITORS
1.) National Policy Statements (NPSs) are a key part of the new planning system that was established by the Planning Act 2008. They are strategic planning documents will set out the  national  need for major infrastructure developments  such as power stations, ports, airports, roads  and transmission lines. When an application is submitted for such a development above a certain threshold, there will be a presumption in favour of granting permission. The Government has said it intends to publish a draft Airports NPS next year.

2.) Six local authorities in West London (Hammersmith and Fulham, Hounslow, Hillingdon, Richmond upon Thames, Wandsworth and Windsor & Maidenhead) are claimants to the challenge, alongside   the local residents group (NoTRAG) and the national campaigning group against airport expansion HACAN. WWF-UK, Campaign to Protect Rural England and Greenpeace are also claimants. Transport for London is an independent party supporting the claim. The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds is an expert witness. The challenge is also supported by Kensington and Chelsea and the Mayor of London. The local authorities are all members of the 2M Group which comprises 24 local councils opposed to Heathrow expansion with a combined population of 5 million.

3.) The legal challenge was launched in April 2009 and the case was heard in the High Court at a rolled-up hearing on the 23rd – 25th February 2010.

4.) In February 2007, Greenpeace won a Judicial Review against the Government’s energy review which backed a new generation of nuclear power stations. As a result the government was forced to re-run the public consultation.

5.) If a third runway at Heathrow airport were to be built, the airport would become the largest single emitter of carbon dioxide in the UK. Unrestrained airport expansion would make it impossible for the UK to play its part in tackling climate change. The Government has committed the UK to cuts of at least 80% in CO2 emissions by 2050. Research from the respected Tyndall Centre shows that if the industry is allowed to expand as predicted, aviation emissions alone would make it impossible to meet this target.

6.) Aviation has a number of high-altitude impacts that increase its total warming effect on the climate. The Committee on Climate Change has recently suggested that aviation has a Global Warming Potential of around two, meaning that its total warming effect is twice that of its CO2 emissions alone.

7.) In December 2009, the Committee on Climate Change published a report with recommendations of how the Government target to reduce aviation emissions to 2005 levels by 2050 could be met. The Committee recommended that aviation growth needs to be limited to around half of that planned in the White Paper, but warned that the target may need to be further tightened in the future.

8.) All the claimants are represented by Harrison Grant (solicitors) instructing Nigel Pleming QC of 39 Essex Street, Nathalie Lieven QC and David Forsdick of Landmark Chambers.

London, England (CNN) — Despite the financial downturn affecting property prices and construction projects around the world, bullish American billionaire Donald Trump remains committed to building what he has dubbed the “world’s greatest golf course” in Scotland after unveiling designs for the new complex.

Trump’s proposal includes 950 holiday homes, a hotel, an equestrian center, tennis courts and a residential village, on top of the championship golf course.

With latest official statistics showing unemployment in Scotland has risen to 7.6 percent, the move has been welcomed by the country’s government who are anxious to bring investment to the area.

A spokesman for the ruling Scottish Nationalist Party told CNN: “Ministers agreed with the public inquiry conclusion that there was significant economic and social benefit to be gained from the application by Trump International Golf Links Scotland to develop a golf resort at Balmedie.”

The recent unveiling of the design masterplan for the resort comes at a time when similar projects around the world struggle for a positive return on investment.

The $1 billion “Tiger Woods Dubai” a golf resort originally planned for September 2009, has been delayed indefinitely with only eight holes been built so far.

Trump’s project, which has been marred by controversy and litigation since its inception in 2008, will cost a staggering $1.6 billion to complete.

Richard Gillis, editor of Platform Magazine, told CNN that: “Trump is betting that the market for the very top end has not been detrimentally affected by the recession and banking crisis.

“It will be interesting to see the effect of the Trump brand on sales, as it is untested as a means of selling golf outside of the U.S.”

But Trump, an avid golfer who already owns 13 courses around the world, is said to be confident his resort will be profitable within a decade.

“When I create anything – a building, private club or resort – it is the highest quality available in the world,” he stated.

“The project is in really good shape with no financial concerns,” the project’s executive vice president, Sarah Malone, told CNN.

She revealed Trump has recently bought another two courses in the United States.

However, to realize his vision, Trump will still need to acquire four plots of land owned by families on the Scottish coast, who have thus far been adamant in their refusal to sell their homes.

Last year a 15,000-strong petition, which included Hollywood actress Tilda Swinton, backed the four residents who face possible eviction.

But Malone insisted that the project would bring much-needed financial benefits to the region.”This would regenerate an area that needs to diversify its business. It will also create thousands of jobs,” she said.

Gillis is more skeptical. “The billion dollar figure, the thousands of jobs promised and the always unreliable ‘economic benefit’ arguments look like winning the day,” he said.

“I only hope that in return for giving up this stretch of their coastline the locals can at least make some money from the caper.

“Because given the level of green fees needed to make back Trump’s investment, very few of them will be playing the course,” he added.

Trump fought a long battle to gain planning approval for the course north of Aberdeen.

It was finally granted by the Scottish government in November 2008, who imposed a series of stringent conditions to protect the habitat of the area, but were swayed by arguments over job creation, with up to 6,000 forecasted, and regeneration.

Trump is due in Scotland in May to officially mark the start of construction work on his course and hopes to talk to local people about the project, his spokesperson told CNN.

Link to original CNN article

The Highland capital is on a shortlist of the UK’s worst eyesores

Inverness has emerged as a surprise contender to be shamed as the country’s most dismal city in the inaugural UK Carbuncle awards.

The Highland capital could earn the dubious honour after a panel of UK architects and designers singled it out for its “monstrous” city centre design and “mushrooming suburban sprawl”.

The awards panel has also nominated Methil, in Fife, for the “hulking Soviet-style” power station that dominates its docks.

Until now, the awards have been open only to Scottish towns and cities, but this year a number of English locations are being suggested as possible winners, including Corby, in Northamptonshire,, Bradford, Sunderland and Salford.

Previous recipients of the unwanted gong include Glenrothes, Coatbridge and the two-time winner Cumbernauld.

As the competition now covers the UK, the title will be even less coveted.

“Inverness has been called the fastest-growing city in Europe but at what price?” said a spokesman for the Carbuncle Awards.

“It has been dubbed ‘Tulloch town’ by critics due to that developer’s dominance over an ever-mushrooming suburban sprawl.

“In addition, the historic centre has been blighted by box-like monstrosities dating back to the 1960s.”

The buildings that caused greatest offence to the panel of judges, which includes Wayne Hemingway, a fashion designer, are the twin concrete tower blocks that dominate the city’s skyline.

One of the edifices previously housed the headquarters of Highlands and Islands Enterprise (HIE) but has now been turned into flats. The other houses the offices of the Crofters Commission.

Both structures were exposed to international derision by the American travel writer Bill Bryson in his book Notes From a Small Island.

He described them as “two sensationally ugly modern office buildings that blot the town centre beyond any hope of redemption”.

“They weren’t just ugly and large, but so ill-designed that you could actually walk round them twice without ever finding the front entrance,” he wrote.

While Alex Graham, the deputy provost of Inverness, conceded that the city’s appearance was not perfect, he said it was ridiculous to single it out as one of the ugliest in the UK.

“It is unfortunate we have inherited some particularly unsightly buildings that were put up in the 1960s near the River Ness,” he said.

“Sadly they have spoiled what should be a terrific view of the city’s skyline.

“Despite this, Inverness is an attractive city with tremendous charm and we have recently spent £7m transforming the old town.

“The population has continued to grow throughout the recession and that just wouldn’t happen if it really was a dismal place to live.”

Professor James Hunter, a former chief executive of HIE, said that urban planners were to blame for the city’s poor appearance. “Inverness has the great natural advantage of having a dramatic, fast-flowing river going right through the middle of it,” he said.

“However, planners seemed to turn their back on it and even today not enough is being done to capitalise on it.”

Hunter, who is director of the UHI’s history department, described his former workplace and its sister building as “completely horrible and repulsive”.

While the judging panel said Methil had suffered from decades of deindustrialisation, Arthur Robertson, an SNP councillor in the Fife town, said measures were being taken to arrest its decline.

“The power plant is not the most attractive of buildings, but it is planned to be removed in the very near future,” he said. “We are working hard on regenerating the seafront and I’m confident the negative headlines will be reversed in years to come.”

John Glenday, of Urban Realm, the architectural magazine that runs the Carbuncle Awards, rebutted criticism that they were too negative, insisting that they were a “force for good and a real motivator for change”.

“Our agenda is not to kick a town when it’s down, but to offer constructive help and advice,” he said. “We want to help turn cities around and for them to use the Carbuncles as a springboard for future growth.”

Glenday also denied that the awards tended to single out poor communities.

“The point is to highlight locations which have potential that local leaders are failing to exploit,” he said.

“Truly depressing places are the ones stifled by a lack of attention, creativity and ambition.”

Members of public are being invited to nominate their contenders for the award. The winner will be decided by public vote later this year.

Salford, in Greater Manchester, was nominated for its “placelessness” and grim tower blocks, Corby for its mishandled attempts at regeneration and Sunderland for failing to stop a “steady drain” of facilities and people to nearby Newcastle.

Bradford was chosen after plans for a new shopping precinct were aborted, leaving a muddy cavity in the heart of the city centre.

Last year’s winner was the Fife new town of Glenrothes, which was lambasted for its “drab and dismal” centre and “woeful” 1980s shopping centre.

Link to original article – Timesonline

By Iain Ramage – Press and Journal

Published: 25/01/2010

The Highland capital is a contender to be named the UK’s ugliest city. A panel of architects and designers included Inverness in the nominations for the UK-wide Carbuncle Awards.

It makes the list for the “monstrous” design of the city centre and “mushrooming suburban sprawl”.

Cumbernauld, Glenrothes and Coatbridge are among past recipients of the award, which used to be restricted to Scotland.

People in Inverness greeted the nomination with a mixture of anger and acceptance last night.

An awards spokesman said the Highland capital had been dubbed “Tulloch town” by some critics due to the local developer’s dominance and highlighted earlier “box-like monstrosities” in the city centre.

There was a degree of acceptance of the criticism yesterday – but optimism that things would change.

City provost Jimmy Gray said: “The 1960s Bridge Street buildings are probably not the most attractive, but to say Inverness is anywhere near the ugliest in the UK is utter nonsense. Most people who visit think it’s an extremely attractive place.”

His deputy, Alex Graham, agreed, insisting Inverness was an attractive city with tremendous charm.

Local SNP councillor John Finnie was equally surprised.

He offered to escort panel members around the city to show them “the many wonderful historic sites” Inverness has to offer.

Labour councillor John Holden said the council had inherited a lot of poorly designed buildings but had attempted to redress that.

Barrie Haycock, of local pressure group Planning Watch, said it was only a matter of time before Inverness was singled out for such an award. He said: “Unfortunately, Highland Council seems to have adopted a policy of chasing planning gain monies rather than developing integrated communities for the benefit of those who choose to live in the area.”

He added that millions of pounds were spent on the Inverness Streetscape project while surrounding streets remained pockmarked with decaying buildings.

Inverness South community council member Liz Gilchrist added: “In the haste to make Inverness a city, it has been developed into a sprawling mass, losing its identity.”

Thomas Prag, another Lib Dem city councillor, disputed the carbuncle tag but urged planners and colleagues to be more imaginative.

He said: “A lot of estates were built in a hurry because the demand was there. But we’re beginning to put that right and the Housing Expo is a hugely positive sign that we now know better.”

Urban Realm, the architectural magazine behind the awards, promotes the event as “a force for good and a real motivator” to transform cities. The winner will be decided by public vote.

Council chief makes clear public will pick up the tab if event does not go ahead

By jonny muir – Press and Journal

Published: 16/11/2009

The taxpayer will pick up the tab if a multimillion-pound exhibition showcasing environmentally friendly homes is cancelled, it has emerged.

Scotland’s Housing Expo is due to be held at Balvonie Braes, Inverness, in August 2010, but contingency plans have been prepared in case the event is abandoned or delayed.

In a report to councillors, Geoff Robson, Highland Council’s head of environment and development, said cancellation would lead to the liquidation of the Expo company, with “any outstanding debts being met from public sector resources”.

Identified risks that could lead to postponement of the 55-home event, which has already been delayed by a year, include failure to complete houses on time, low ticket sales or insufficient sponsorship.

Expo board chairman Jean Urquhart yesterday predicted “success, not disaster” and said a risk assessment had to be prepared to “reassure all our partners in the event of disaster”.

She said the prospect of cancellation was “simply not being contemplated”, but conceded there was a chance that the homes might not all be completed in time.

Despite the assurance, there were calls at the weekend to scrap the event, believed to be costing about £5million, to avoid it becoming a “white elephant”.

Barrie Haycock, a member of Inverness South Community Council, said: “There would be uproar from everybody if the event had to be cancelled.

“That money could have built a new school in Milton of Leys.”

Questioning the Expo’s potential to generate a budgeted £180,000 in ticket sales, he added: “Where they think these people are going to come from – given that large annual exhibitions with free admission are held in Glasgow, Birmingham, Manchester and London – is a mystery to anyone who has an understanding of marketing.”

Liz Gilchrist, who sits on a community liaison group of councillors, Expo representatives, residents and ward managers, said organisers had been upbeat about the event’s prospects at their last meeting on October 14.

She said: “They were very positive and hoping to get the site up and running by April. The public sector is already peeved at cuts, and having to carry the can for this would rub salt in the wound.”

Inverness South councillor John Holden added: “There is a great danger of it not happening, and I fear the public purse will have to pay for what is someone’s badly thought-out dream.”

In a report to Wednesday’s planning, environment and development committee, Mr Robson said the Expo would be promoted by a 10-month travelling exhibition.

Budget forecasts indicate that, as well as generating £180,000 from ticket sales, the Expo must make £80,000 from sponsorship, £27,000 from parking charges and £20,000 from brochure sales.

The Expo, previously called the Highland Housing Fair, aims to showcase modern low-energy housing designs, stimulate the wider use of timber construction and promote the “creativity and quality of lifestyle” in the Highlands.

Read more: http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/1484194#ixzz0XCmXpbQn

Planning Watch pictures of the forlorn and neglected site taken on 15th November 2009:

Entrance to the site

No evidence of house building commencement

Some 29,623 homes would need to be built in the region annually

The government has announced it is to rethink controversial plans to build more than half a million new homes in the South West region of England.

The Regional Spatial Strategy for the South West (RSSSW) proposed 592,460 new homes to meet official predictions of housing needs for the next 20 years.

But the plans have met with significant opposition.

The government now says it wants to ensure the RSSSW is the “most sustainable way forward”.

Negative response

The Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) and the Government Office for the South West (GOSW) had hoped to sign off the plan by June of this year.

But in May the High Court ruled it had not considered “reasonable alternatives” to some proposals in the South East of England.

And officials have acknowledged they have been influenced by the “unprecedented level” of opposition.

Some 35,000 responses were received during the RSSSW public consultation – the majority negative.

A GOSW statement said it would now carry out a new appraisal to ensure the current blueprints “represent the most sustainable way forward for the region”.

‘Partial victory’

Chris Pope, co-chairman of the Dundry Residents Action Group, which campaigns against building on greenbelt land in North Somerset, said: “In some ways I view this as a partial victory.

“We’ve always questioned the government’s figures.

“Their expectations of population growth seem extortionately high.

“But from our point of view, the problem has not gone away.”

The results are not expected to come in before early next year.

Ministers will then have to decide whether to scale down the South West’s housing targets.

Link to original BBC article

A village built in Argyll to meet the demands of the UK oil boom of the 1970s but abandoned without ever being occupied is set for a new role.

Pollphail at Portavadie was to house workers needed to construct concrete oil rigs, but the plan was abandoned.

The site’s owner Alan Bradley said changes would start to be seen within a year as demolition clears the area for the first of 270 new properties.

The “ghost village” revamp has been in the planning process for nine years.

Mr Bradley said it could be five to 10 years before the redevelopment was completed.

Previous owners of the site on the Cowal Peninsula have included the failed bank, BCCI.

Craig Anderson BBC Scotland This is one of the most bizarre places I’ve visited in Scotland – and I’ve been to a few. Keys still dangle on a board waiting for tenants who would never arrive. Coat hangers remain in cupboards and rusting washing machines stand idle, dreaming of their first spin cycle. It’s easy to write off the whole Portavadie development as a madcap government white elephant. Yet the early 1970s were pioneering days for the fledgling UK oil industry and the government of the day would have been heavily criticised had it failed to grasp the nettle and provide construction facilities. Had industry preferences been different, Portavadie might have become as important as Ardersier, Nigg and Methil, where thousands of workers built oil rigs and platforms for a generation. With a top quality marina now open and plans to redevelop Pollphail village, some of that hoped-for prosperity may now be arriving by a different route.

The village – big enough to house 500 people – was built along with a dry dock as the UK government rushed to cash in on North Sea oil.

Similar yards were created at Nigg in Easter Ross and Whiteness, near Ardersier, in the Highlands.

Argyll and Bute councillor Bruce Marshall said the potential work for Portavadie dried up before the workers could arrive on site.

He said: “The houses were built, but the whole thing fell through and concrete oil rigs were no longer the flavour of the month.

“For the past 35 years these houses have been inhabited by sheep and bats and just fallen into disrepair.”

The dry dock, meanwhile, has been turned into a marina.

Local photographer Philippa Elliott has documented the derelict site in a series of photographs.

Her images include a rack of door keys hanging disused and rusting washing machines.

She said some locals believed Pollphail was actually built as a military base on par with Faslane on the Clyde, but other suggestions for what the site was to be used for differ “depending on who you talked to”.

Putting it to use for the construction of concrete rigs was always the last idea offered, the photographer said.

Efforts are also being made to breathe new life into the yards in the Highlands.

Government ministers have been urged to take a greater interest in efforts to put Nigg back into business.

Renewable energy

Highland Council has asked Enterprise Minister Jim Mather to chair a meeting discussing the future of Nigg.

It has also pressed Secretary of State Jim Murphy to encourage the UK Government to become involved.

Potential roles for the site include using it in the construction of renewable energy devices.

At Whiteness, situated on the shores of the Moray Firth, 2,000 homes are planned along with recreation, leisure and fitness facilities.

A marina for yachts and other craft would also be built.

The site’s life as a construction yard ended in 2002 when owners J Ray McDermott closed it down following almost 30 years of activity.

At its height, there were more than 3,000 workers employed there.

BBC article link

Secret Scotland

Copies of the 26-page booklet, showcasing the Highland Housing Fair, were distributed at the Scottish Parliament in a move by the organisers to secure £4.75 million of public money for the event, due to be held next year at Balvonie Braes.

The brochure clearly stated that the site was chosen because it is close to Milton of Leys which has a primary school, church hall, local shops and public house, surgery, day care facilities and playing field.

However, after angry local residents and community leaders pointed out that the only community facility in the area is a postbox, housing fair organisers were forced to acknowledge their error.

A spokesman said that 500 copies were printed in time for a reception held at the parliament on 13th January.

Some had been handed out to those present, including MSPs, but the rest will now be withdrawn and destroyed.

“There was no intention to mislead anyone,” the spokesman said. “It was an error made in the haste of getting the booklet ready for the reception. The error in the booklet will be corrected for future print runs.”

Barrie Haycock, a local resident and chairman of Planning Watch UK, described the document, which contains the Highland Council logo, as “greatly misleading”.

“It is a complete fabrication of reality,” he said. “There are no community facilities with the exception of a postbox at Milton of Leys.

“It is an absolute disgrace that Highland Council could put its name to a document which is misleading to any person who takes the time and trouble to read it.”

The brochure at the centre of the controversy. Alasdair Allen

Bob Roberts, chairman of the Inverness South Community Council, was equally bemused by the publication, which states: “The site is well-located next to the Milton of Leys local centre which is easily accessible on foot.”

The council gave an additional £40,000 to the housing fair’s board last year. The money was to be used for a range of things including ticket and brochure printing plus advertising and promotion of the fair.

“Is this what they are using the money for?” Mr Roberts queried.

“I am absolutely outraged at this. The community at Milton of Leys has been totally misled by this. We have been promised these facilities for years and years and still they never appear — yet they seem to say they exist in this publication. We would love them to exist.”

Such was the concern about the lack of facilities in the rapidly-expanding suburb that a steering group, including Highland councillors, community councillors and other community representatives, was set up last year. A wish-list of priorities included a school and a multi-purpose community hall with sports facilities.

The housing fair, based on a Finnish model, is due to showcase 55 eco-homes which will be sold afterwards. The event, billed as the first of its kind in Scotland, had been due to be held in August but was postponed until 2010 due to the economic climate.

v.sweeney@inverness-courier.co.uk

A new dawn for the Housing Fair at Milton of Leys looks increasingly unlikely. Gary Anthony

But unless the Scottish Government now agrees to underwrite the project to the tune of £4.75 million, and persuades banks to provide development funding, it is unclear how the event will proceed at all.

It comes amid further disarray after it transpired hundreds of brochures — designed to attract government support — are to be destroyed because they contain inaccurate information. And with time running out for work to start, this latest twist has prompted furious opponents to demand sackings at the highest management level.

The financial difficulties facing the housing fair are contained in the minutes of a meeting of the Scottish parliamentary cross party group on architecture and the built environment at which there was a presentation by housing fair representatives including the board’s chairman, Councillor Jean Urquhart, and Susan Torrance, chief executive of the Highland Housing Alliance.

The December meeting also included discussion on the economic requirements for the fair to proceed.

Although the cost of the affordable houses will be met from housing association grants, the current economic climate has resulted in a reluctance from banks to fund individual private developers.

“Currently, plan A is to ask the Scottish Government to underwrite the costs and encourage the private finance sector to support the developers,” the minutes state. “No official application has been submitted to the government in this respect at present. It was not clear how the fair would proceed without this support.”

The minutes also summarise comments made by Ms Torrance. “The key message from her team is that they need some serious influence and support to persuade the banks to provide the development funding and allow the project to proceed,” it is reported.

Yesterday, however, she insisted the housing fair was going ahead and that infrastructure was already in place. “We are not applying for public money,” she said. “We are asking the government to steady the nerves of the banks.”

But opponents of the project, which has been dogged by controversy from the start, think the government should not support it, while some queried whether it would now go ahead. There was also continuing anger about a brochure showcasing the event which wrongly claimed the nearby Milton of Leys area had an array of shops, a school, pubs, church and sports facilities.

Councillor John Holden (Inverness South) described the brochure as “absolute fiction”.

“Heads should roll over this,” he declared. “This has to go to the top of the tree in relation to the Highland Housing Fair.”

He said the event, which was to be developed on designated green belt land, was tainted from day one. “I can never see a situation where I personally would support one more penny going to the housing fair,” he said. “I can never see it taking off.”

Mary Scanlon, Highlands and Islands Conservative MSP, who was present at last month’s parliamentary presentation, also questioned the management of the project.

“They have not worked with the community and their recent charm offensive at the Scottish Parliament was based on a brochure of lies and untruths,” she said. “I think the management of this project is rapidly losing credibility and trust from funders.

“The management of this housing fair is highly regrettable because I have not met anyone who does not support the idea of the housing fair of environmentally-friendly sustainable houses.”

v.sweeney@inverness-courier.co.uk

Sleaze charge rocks West Lothian Council

Dec 24 2008 by Alistair Watson, West Lothian Courier

AN award winning council is in turmoil as allegations of corruption and sleaze threaten to tear it apart.

Council leader Peter Johnston faces calls for his resignation after Councillor Gordon Beurskens was reported to police over his role in an £8 million planning application for a mixed development scheme at Whitrigg, Whitburn.

Councillor Beurskens, who helps prop up the SNP administration, was working as a consultant for Aftondale Ltd, the firm who lodged the application, while sitting on the local authority’s development committee.

Councillors on the committee must show impartiality on planning applications but the Action to Save St John’s councillor is at the centre of a row regarding a financial interest in the plan being approved.

Despite the plan being rejected by planning officials the proposal was pushed through by councillors at a meeting last month with the casting vote coming from SNP committee chairman Jim Dickson. Councillor Dickson has since stood down from his post pending an independent inquiry.

Graeme Morrice, Labour group leader on the council, claims the allegations of wrong-doing go straight to the heart of the administration. He has called on Councillor Johnston to step down while the police and Standards Commission investigate.

But the council leader called the complaints a politically motivated campaign from the Labour party to discredit his administration.

He added that he was unaware of any substance to the allegations, which will also be investigated in an independent inquiry.

Councillor Johnston continued: “I think it’s important to recognise that the council has no evidence whatsoever to substantiate the claims made by Labour councillors in relation to irregularities by Councillor Beurskens.

“The council has, quite rightly I think, passed them on to the police for them to investigate.

“I would expect any responsible political party to wait for the results of the inquiry before celebrating.

“I am confident that the matters will be fully investigated and he will be completely exonerated.

“The results will be fully published and we will do that in an open and transparent manner and there will be no hiding anything.

“I think the political administration will come out of this clear and clean.”

It has also been revealed that council leader Peter Johnston was copied into e-mails sent to planning staff by Councillor Beurskens in his capacity as a consultant on the Whitrigg plans.

In some he uses choice and threatening language and in one he wrote it would take him “two minutes to change the complexion of a council”.

Councillor Johnston added: “I can’t condone his use of language in the e-mails. It wasn’t appropriate for council officers to be addressed in this way.

“We want the officers working in an environment that they are completely comfortable with.

“I think everyone will learn lessons from this. One of them will be that officers are to be treated with respect and not as political footballs.”

Labour leader, Councillor Morrice, said the council leader couldn’t distance himself from the actions of those members of his administration.

He added: “These actions go to the heart of the administration. It has now been revealed that Councillor Johnston was aware of these alleged wrong doings and did nothing about it. He is therefore complicit.

“Public confidence in the planning system is essential and people need to know that they can trust those who are taking the decisions.

“Before the SNP, Conservative and single issue local hospital councillors took over control of the council from Labour at the election, West Lothian Council was regarded as one of the best politically managed and highly regarded local authorities in Britain.

“Today, this reputation has been left in tatters.”

As the Courier went to press, Councillor Beurskens was unavailable for comment.

A West Lothian Council spokesman commented: “A serious complaint about a planning issue was made to the council. Given the nature of the allegation we have asked the police to investigate. As this is now an on-going enquiry it is not appropriate to comment further.”

Link to original article

Eco-towns of up to 20,000 people each are proposed

The government’s approach to delivering up to 10 eco-towns could be “unlawful”, councils have warned.

Ministers are to publish a planning policy statement to set out standards and potential locations in England.

But the Local Government Association said the proposals went against the principle of development through plans drawn up by local authorities.

This might show a wish to avoid “proper scrutiny”, it added. But the government said it “absolutely” disagreed.

‘Deeply flawed’

The eco-towns scheme aims to deliver settlements of 5,000 to 20,000 homes which are zero-carbon overall.

The government shortlisted 15 proposals for new settlements in April and has said up to 10 final approved bids will have to go through the planning process once they have been chosen later this year.

Lawyers John Steel QC and James Strachan, representing the LGA, said an existing planning policy statement covered the concept of providing housing in new settlements in an environmentally sustainable way.

‘ECO-TOWNS’ SHORTLIST Bordon, Hampshire Coltishall, Norfolk Elsenham, Essex Ford, West Sussex Hanley Grange, Cambridgeshire Imerys, nr St Austell, Cornwall Leeds city region, West Yorkshire Marston Vale and New Marston, Bedfordshire Middle Quinton, Warwickshire Pennbury, Leicestershire Rossington, South Yorkshire Rushcliffe, Nottinghamshire Weston Otmoor, Oxfordshire Source: Department of Communities and Local Government The plans: Site-by-site

There did not seem to be any justification for promoting eco-towns outside the existing rules, “other than the government’s wish to avoid the system due to the proper need for scrutiny, which takes time”, they added.

The LGA said the legal advice showed the government’s approach to eco-towns was “deeply flawed”.

Chairman Sir Simon Milton said the LGA was not opposed to the eco-towns as a way of meeting housing needs and combating climate change.

But he urged: “Ministers must talk to council leaders about adopting a new approach that will deliver development in places where councils and local people agree that eco-towns can work.

“Eco-towns must be delivered without bypassing the planning processes and ensure that new developments have good transport connections alongside the schools, health and leisure facilities which are needed to create places where people would want to live.”

Bidders for eco-towns at Manby, in Lincolnshire, and Curborough, Staffordshire, have pulled out, while part of a third bid at New Marston, in Bedfordshire, has also been withdrawn.

‘Stretching standards’

A Department for Communities and Local Government spokesman said: “We absolutely disagree with the LGA’s claims and believe this legal advice can only have been obtained on the basis of a misrepresentation of our policy.

“We have made it absolutely clear throughout that eco-towns will be different and will have higher environmental standards than a normal development and the applications will also have to be considered through the normal planning process.”

Shadow housing minister Grant Shapps said the legal advice would add weight to the argument that ministers had “effectively destroyed their own eco-town project”.

Liberal Democrat communities spokeswoman Julia Goldsworthy said: “What this government fails to understand is that centrally imposed solutions are doomed to failure.”

Housing fair faces delay of 12 months

By Lorna Paterson – Inverness Courier

Published: 22 July, 2008

The site of the Highland Housing Fair at Balvonie Braes.

THE controversial Highland Housing Fair is facing another major blow — it is set to be delayed for a year.

The exhibition of sustainable housing, billed as the first of its kind in Scotland, had been scheduled to take place in August 2009 at Balvonie Braes in Inverness.

However, it emerged yesterday that growing financial pressures and a downturn in the housing market meant the event will not now be staged until 2010.

Architects and developers from the south were briefed on the latest developments in Perth last week, while developers from the Highlands will be informed on Friday at a meeting in Inverness.The board will then meet to make a final decision although Councillor Jean Urquhart, chairwoman of the Highland Housing Fair board, admitted delaying the event was already looking like the most likely outcome.

She confirmed some developers involved with the project were facing financial difficulty and rather than putting pressure on them, the board would be making the recommendation to its partners.

In the worst case scenario she anticipates the delay to be for 12 months.

However, an on-line architects’ website said there were fears the project, led by Highland Housing Alliance, would lose momentum, particularly if it was postponed for more than a year.

Barrie Haycock, chairman of campaign group Planning Watch UK, while criticising organisers for not forecasting the impact of a declining housing market, also remained sceptical over whether the fair would now go-ahead.

For the event to take place in 2010, he said, the new homes would still need to be built next year, but with experts predicting it to be two years before the housing market recovers he sees this as unlikely. “It was obvious that any downturn in the housing market would put the project at risk,” he said.

He claimed it had collectively landed the tax payer with an enormous bill out of the rush to force it through the planning process.

Inverness MP Danny Alexander said it was a reminder of what impact the global credit crunch was having on the Highlands. “This is very disappointing,” he said. “The fair would have made a great contribution to the Highlands in terms of leading new ideas on how homes can be developed.

Councillor Urquhart (Wester Ross, Strathpeffer and Lochalsh) explained there had been no public announcement about the delay because it was still in consultation with developers and architects.

The housing fair, on an area of green-wedge land, will showcase the best in housing design, innovation and technology.

It has been dogged with controversy with allegations over the conduct of planning officers and unacceptable land deals playing their part but Councillor Urquhart stressed the event would go ahead.

“It makes me angry that people see this as some kind of trumped up nonsense that doesn’t need to happen. There is absolutely no suggestion this will be a cancellation,” she added.

l.paterson@inverness-courier.co.uk

Wilson’s Weekly Wrap

27 Jun 2008

Highland Housing – Fair?

On the surface, things seem to be going not too badly at the moment for the Highland Housing Fair, given the perverse local opposition encountered at the outset of the project and the high drop out rate of developers who found innovation and profit on a single house plot to be incompatible concepts. Down at the coalface, however, a number of the selected architects are finding the going considerably tougher.

Time is flying, and deadlines for Building Warrant applications, for example, are being missed due to the shifting economic times in which we live. Several of the projects are still without either client or developer, never mind a contractor, and with building work for most projects scheduled to be on site by late Autumn, some critical decisions need to be made at a more strategic level if we are not to see a half-constructed built landscape when the Fair opens its doors to the public next August.

A number of the project designs are predicated on imported components such as massive timber panels, now made infinitely more expensive by the £’s poor showing against the €uro and without significant alteration at this late stage, the houses may simply fail to emerge. Obviously the credit crunch was not on anyone’s radar when the idea of the Fair was first mooted, but life is not as it was a year ago and the project sponsors need to radically – and rapidly – revise the business plan if the Fair is to be a success.

In Finland, the first Housing Fairs were publicly-funded with small towns competing for the privilege to build: the model used here presumed that developers could be encouraged to innovate (without subsidy) and even profit from the construction of a single housing unit, a questionable approach anyway given the concept’s first outing in Scotland.

Now that the tectonic plates of banking have shifted inexorably to a position of financial denial to housing developers, the Fair’s initiators at government and public agency level need to dig deep into their pockets to make sure the project does not become an architectural disaster zone: should the project fail, there will be no second chance to learn from the experience. And, be assured, as the various previously-interested parties cover their tracks, it will be the architects that will end up carrying the can for their supposedly un-fundable designs. The reputational damage to the profession just doesn’t bear thinking about.

Wilson’s Weekly Wrap

http://www.architecturescotland.co.uk/news/685/Wilson’s_Weekly_Wrap.html

4 Jul 2008

Highland Housing Fair, Part Two

It’s not often I get to see such immediate impact from something I’ve written and in truth it was probably more serendipity than prescience on my part, but following my ‘warning light’ comments last week about next year’s Highland Housing Fair in Inverness, the organisers seem to have taken my advice to heart and moved with commendable rapidity to postpone the event by a year. This is far from being a bad thing – the number of developers unable to raise bank finance for their individual projects was reaching a dangerously high level and the people responsible for the Fair have made the only prudent move possible in the circumstances. Far better to delay than to fail ignominiously and in any case the reasons for the postponement can be readily understood by all. What developer was going to proceed – even had they been able to secure the necessary funding – with construction at current Inverness price levels when the bottom is dropping out of the housing market and likely to pummel the post-Housing Fair sales values?

That said, invoking Plan B can only be seen as a necessarily reactive move and the need for a well thought through Plan C is now pressing. With a shade more time on the delivery side of the project, the need to reduce construction costs without diminishing the design quality of the individual houses needs some real creative thinking. Consideration could, for example, be given to the implementation of a professional sponsorship programme focused on in-kind provision of materials and products for all of the houses planned for the site. Hardly complicated, it is one of the few routes to overall cost reduction that are available in the current economic climate, but it will require co-coordinated – and speedy – action rather than allowing the projects to individually stand or fall. 2010 is not that far away.

Highland Housing Fair Postponed for a Year

4 Jul 2008

steven.raeburn@carnyx.com

The Highland Housing Fair, billed as the first event of its kind in Scotland to showcase house designs of the future, has been unexpectedly postponed.

The event, scheduled to kick off in Inverness in a year’s time, was intended to be a showpiece event where over 50 conceptual, sustainable houses would be on display, will now take place in August 2010.

The downturn in the property market, the poor prospects for the resale of the homes to be constructed, and a lack of finance have been blamed for the postponement.

“A recommendation will be made to the Highland Housing Fair board to delay the Fair from August 2009 to August 2010, in recognition of the economic climate and the shortage of finance available to realise the ambitions of the developers who are committed to the project,” the organisers said in a statement.

“The recommendation will be made at the meeting of the Highland Housing Fair board which will take place in August 2008.”

It had been planned that the houses constructed for the fair would be available to buy, to become a “living community” once the fair ended.

Writing exclusively for architecturescotland.co.uk, Peter Wilson speculated that fear of the declining property market may have prompted the postponement.

“Far better to delay than to fail ignominiously and in any case the reasons for the postponement can be readily understood by all,” he writes.

“What developer was going to proceed – even had they been able to secure the necessary funding – with construction at current Inverness price levels when the bottom is dropping out of the housing market and likely to pummel the post-Housing Fair sales values?”

Following discussions with the major construction companies, the CBI has agreed to set up a Construction Council chaired by John McDonough, chief executive of Carillion plc and vice chairman of the CBI’s Public Services Strategy Board.

The Council, which will represent contractors, house builders, civil engineers, component and product manufacturers, designers and support services, will begin its work in September.

The CBI’s director-general, Richard Lambert said: “The UK construction industry consists of over 250,000 firms, employing 2.1 million people in a wide variety of roles, and accounts for almost 9 per cent of GDP.

“Until now, this important industry has not had the single unified voice it deserves.

“The Construction Council will work closely with the major trade bodies to strengthen their efforts to represent the construction industry and ensure its concerns are clearly heard.”

John McDonough, who will lead the work of the new Council, added: “These are challenging times for the construction industry. While many companies continue to enjoy good markets in the UK and overseas, others, particularly those with exposure to the UK residential market, are facing challenging times.

“Setting up the new Construction Council is, therefore, particularly timely. The Council’s new strategic role at the heart of the CBI will enable the whole sector to benefit from the CBI’s unrivaled access at the highest levels in Whitehall, Westminster and Brussels.”
The Construction Council will be considering a broad range of issues including the economy, energy, land use planning, procurement, climate change and skills.

Stephen Nickell
Fears housing chances are becoming social polarised.

Professor Stephen Nickell said that, unless conditions change, the target of three million new homes in England by 2020 will not be met.

To get to this target, the housing industry needs to be building 240,000 homes a year, a figure that few think they will achieve this year.

The industry is already behind in its construction targets.

Just over 200,000 new homes were built last year.

Priced out

Homebuilders have cut back new building this year as a lack of mortgage products and falling house prices have cut demand.

Mr Nickell, who heads the National Housing and Planning Advice Unit, believes that alongside the financial constraints local authorities are also holding up new house building.

The wealthier people in society can satisfy their housing demands, more or less, as they get richer Professor Stephen Nickell

“Unless local authorities are given a strong incentive to allow house building in their locality, it seems to me very unlikely that we will hit the housing targets,” he said.

“And if you don’t keep building these houses the prices just keep going up relative to people’s incomes.”

Government figures published recently showed that new housing work was down 5% in the first quarter of this year compared with the same period in 2007.

The Home Builders Federation, which represents major house builders, said that new building work did not show any signs of picking up.

“Right now the credit crunch is stopping people from getting the finance that people need to buy homes,” said John Slaughter, director of external affairs at the Federation.

“Longer term we need a better business environment and less regulatory cost to get the industry moving.”

The big building companies are beginning to show the strain with rumours that they may have to raise new capital to survive.

The two giants of the industry, Taylor Wimpey and Barratt Developments, carry a total of more than £2.5 billion of debt.

That equates to more than double their combined market worth.

The financial pain being felt by the companies has already forced one of them, Persimmon, to put a halt on all new building projects.

Falling prices

Figures from the Nationwide this month showed a 2.5% drop in house prices in May, with some predicting a 20% drop by the end of 2008.

But despite falling house prices, Professor Nickell said the current situation seemed to be only benefiting the richer parts of society.

“The wealthier people in society can satisfy their housing demands, more or less, as they get richer. While the rest of us get squashed into smaller and smaller houses.” he said.

And he added that if present trends continue, things are looking bleak for the future of housing in England.

“If the present situation continues we will be less well housed than the majority of people in Europe, Australia or the United States,” he said.

Original Article

Stephen Nickell

Is currently Warden of Nuffield College, Oxford. He was an External Member of the Bank of England Monetary Policy Committee from 2000-2006 writing a number of pieces on the subject of the UK housing market. Until 2005 he was School Professor of Economics at the London School of Economics, following this role from 1984-1998 as Professor of Economics and Director of the Institute of Economics and Statistics at the University of Oxford. He has also had earlier roles as an economist at the London School of Economics, in Paris and at the University of Princeton. He has been awarded a number of academic honours including Fellow of the British Academy and Foreign Honorary Member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. He has published widely in numerous branches of applied economics.

Four and a half years on, ask him if it is still a good place to come to and he hesitates.

“It’s difficult,” he said.

“It’s no better than other areas throughout the UK. The bottom line is that Inverness has the opportunity to learn from other areas and plan accordingly but no-one seems willing to do it.”

This apparent unwillingness to get to grips with the area’s planning deficiencies seems even more surprising to Barrie given the Highlands’ economic reliance on tourism.

“Tourists do not travel to see rows of soulless housing,” he pointed out.

For Barrie, who retired from a career in business at the age of 50, coming to the Highlands was an easy move to make as communications technology allowed his own public relations and allied services firm to operate from anywhere he chose.

He still enjoys getting out on the hills at the weekends and journeying to the unspoiled West Highlands, but soon learned that other parts of the region, not least Inverness itself, were going through what he describes as a quantum change.

To Barrie, Inverness’s rapid growth is being led by developers at the expense of community benefit and with little or no strategic planning or effective planning control “The emphasis in Inverness is on trying to build houses and then try and sort out the problems afterwards,” he said. “Exhibit A is the new trunk road with talk of bulldozing the new church at Inshes and compulsory purchase of properties. You would have thought they would have reserved the land, but that would be too easy.

“There is a growing view of many people in Inverness that the council should firmly get to grips with the situation and control planning so that development can take place in a properly thought out manner.

“Consultation is a joke. It’s a meaningless word in the planning process. Objections are rarely listened to and it’s the will of the developer that prevails over the will of the community.”

His awareness of discontent with the planning situation in Inverness was only heightened by his involvement with local community organisations.

Barrie is a founder member of the Milton of Leys local residents association, a member of Inverness Crime Prevention Panel and an Inverness South Community Councillor. More recently he has become involved with the Highlands and Islands Resilience Group, a disaster planning initiative designed to look at how threats such as pandemic influenza and terrorism could affect the Highlands.

These activities bring him into regular contact with a range of business owners, chamber of commerce members, police officers, community leaders, MPs, MSPs and Highland Council officials and local councillors.

A common topic of conversation has been concern at the way Highland Council is being run and its rapidly growing external debt problem which, by March this year, stood at a gross figure of 580 million.

The loss of prime farm land to residential housing with no meaningful infrastructure is another area of concern.

It was a prominent local councillor who initially suggested that a “Planning Watch” organisation was needed.

Barrie took up the suggestion and, as communities throughout Britain have similar issues to Inverness, widened the remit to create Planning Watch UK.

The organisation’s aims, objectives and interests are not confined to property matters. The regulation of the building industry, including land maintenance and property management companies, remains of prime importance.

“At present the new house build purchaser has been described by the National Consumer Council as having less consumer protection in law than when buying a kettle. This cannot continue and in general allows developers to make huge profits at the expense of the unsuspecting purchaser,” Barrie declared.

Nationally, Planning Watch UK members and contributors are working with MPs, MSPs and other organisations to introduce legislative changes to give houseowners the protection they need, just as locally the organisation wants to see more evidence of meaningful strategic planning.

Barrie Haycock, Planning Watch UK campaigner.

“The developer profit-driven process ignores the crucial requirement of infrastructure,” Barrie commented.

“Any future development must also look at education, health and transport services through to the massive number of jobs required to support the growing communities.”

Equally important are forward planning for roads, sewage and water supply and potential flood risk in certain areas. While there are plenty of bad examples of planning in Britain Telford in Shropshire or Scotland’s post-war New Towns there are also more positive designs which the Highlands could look to, such as Poundbury in Dorset. Designed by architect Leon Krier for landowner Prince Charles, this is an integrated community of shops, businesses and private and social housing and one which the planners of the Highlands would be advised to follow, Barrie suggested.

There are similar projects proposed for the Highlands, such as the “New Urbanist” community at Tornagrain, but for Barrie these being built are on too limited a scale and the principles which they adopt should be applied throughout the Highland region.

His work for Planning Watch UK and his other activities does take up a lot of his time and includes researching and studying local authority documents or fielding inquiries from journalists, but it is something he enjoys. “I don’t like to see people misled or ripped off and I have particular empathy and concerns for elderly people who are hung out to dry by the process. Who do they turn to for support?”

Barrie is scathing of a council which, he says, “would rather spend 300,000 on a fireworks display than care of the elderly.”

“The elderly are always the first to suffer when councils run into funding problems, yet the fat cat desk jockeys who decide the financial cuts continue to thrive,” he stated.

“This issue is constantly being raised by those who suffer and is a high priority for Planning Watch UK. Care of the elderly, young and disabled has to be of major importance but is so often put at the end of the bureaucrats’ list.”

Which is why Planning Watch UK highlights anything it regards as a waste of taxpayers’ money and wants to see local authority and government quango spending kept under strict financial control.

“A local example seems to be the bizarre reported redundancy payouts made to HIE members of staff, some of whom seem to have moved to highly paid new jobs some within Highland Council while collecting massive redundancy payments. This is an absolute disgrace!” he declared.

Barrie stood as an Independent candidate in the 2007 Highland Council election for Inverness South and came last, but reveals that he feels happier outside the political system.

“If you are part of the current system, you could very quickly get drowned under the current method of operation,” he said.

That system has been made even less effective, he believes, by the recent move to a party political council from one with a tradition of political independence and the creation of multi-member wards.

“The multi-councillor ward system isn’t working, full stop. None of the councillors can agree amongst themselves. End result: chaos,” Barrie said.

“Our councillors are paid salaries now, so there should be accountability all the way down from the chief executive to the most junior councillor.”

What is not so important, to Barrie at least, is the political hue of those councillors or even the MPs and MSPs.

“I’m apolitical,” Barrie stated.

“I don’t give a damn what party is in power as long as there are sensible policies from that party and I believe most people think the same.”

c.macleod@inverness-courier.co.uk

Related links

• • Housing fair malpractice to be rejected

‘Cartel activity of the type alleged today harms the economy by distorting competition and keeping prices artificially high. This investigation, together with the OFT’s previous decisions in the roofing sector, will hopefully send out a strong message to the construction industry about the seriousness with which we view suspected anti-competitive behaviour. Businesses have no excuses for not knowing and abiding by the law.’

NOTES

1. Under the Competition Act 1998 and Article 81 of the EC Treaty, cartels are prohibited. Any business found to be a member of a cartel could be fined up to 10 per cent of its worldwide turnover. In calculating financial penalties, the OFT takes into account a number of factors including seriousness of the infringement(s), turnover in the relevant market and any mitigating and/or aggravating factors. The basis of the OFT’s considerations are set out in the OFT’s guidance as to the appropriate amount of a penalty (pdf 145 kb).

2. An SO gives notice of a proposed infringement decision under the Competition Act 1998 to the parties involved. The parties then have the opportunity to make written and oral representations in response to the case set out by the OFT. Such representations will be considered by the OFT before any final decision is made.

3. The SO will not be published. In accordance with the OFT’s guidance on Involving third parties in Competition Act investigations (pdf 289 kb), any person who wishes to comment on the OFT’s provisional findings, and who is in a position to materially assist the OFT in testing its factual, legal or economic arguments, may request a non-confidential version of the statement of objections by contacting the OFT no later than 30 April 2008.

4. The OFT has previously found infringements of the Competition Act in relation to cover pricing and other bid rigging infringements in the roofing sector in five decisions between 2004 and 2006 (see press notices 46/04, 48/05, 126/05 and 34/06). Appeals of the first and last of these decisions to the Competition Appeal Tribunal confirmed the illegality of cover pricing (see press notices 36/05 and 32/07).

5. The OFT has also today published an information note to local authorities and other procuring entities on the implications for them of this announcement. Download the information note (pdf 49 kb).

6. Under the OFT’s leniency policy an undertaking may be granted immunity from penalties or a significant reduction in penalty in return for reporting certain categories of Competition Act infringement and assisting the OFT with its investigation.

7. Anyone who has information about cartels is asked to call the cartels hotline on 0800 085 1664 or email cartelshotline@oft.gsi.gov.uk. The OFT has a policy under which it will pay financial incentives of up to £100,000 in return for information which helps it to identify and take action against illegal cartels. Rewards will be paid only where information is accurate, verifiable and proves to be useful in the OFT’s anti-cartel enforcement work, and will be calculated according to a set formula and not subject to negotiation.

8. The SO has been issued to the following undertakings:

1. A. H. Willis & Sons Limited
2. ARG (Mansfield) Limited
3. Ackroyd & Abbott Limited together with its subsidiary Ackroyd & Abbott Construction Limited
4. Adam Eastwood & Sons Limited together with its controlling party the Sir John Eastwood Foundation
5. Admiral Construction Limited together with (for alleged infringements from 31 October 2003) its ultimate parent company A C Holdings Limited
6. Adonis Construction Limited
7. Allenbuild Limited and Bullock Construction Limited together with their ultimate parent company Renew Holdings plc
8. Apollo Property Services Group Limited formerly known as Apollo London Limited together with its former ultimate parent company Apollo Holdco Limited formerly known as Apollo Group Holdings Limited
9. Arthur M. Griffiths & Sons Limited
10. B & A Construction (Leicester) Limited
11. Baggaley & Jenkins Limited
12. Balfour Beatty Construction Limited, Balfour Beatty Refurbishment Limited, and Balfour Beatty Group Limited (for alleged infringements from 2000 onwards) and Mansell Construction Services Limited (for alleged infringements from 19 December 2003), together with their current ultimate parent company Balfour Beatty plc. For alleged infringements involving Mansell prior to 19 December 2003, Mansell and its former ultimate parent company Mansell plc
13.Ballast Nedam N.V. as the ultimate parent company of its dissolved subsidiary Ballast plc
14.Beaufort Construction (S-in-A) Limited together with its ultimate parent company Beaufort Holdings U.K. Limited
15.Bodill & Sons (Contractors) Limited
16.Bowmer & Kirkland Limited together with its subsidiaries B & K Building Services Limited and B & K Property Services Limited
17.Bramall Construction Limited and Frank Haslam Milan & Company Limited together with their current ultimate parent company Keepmoat Limited, formerly known as Keepmoat plc
18.C. J. Ellmore & Company Limited
19.Caddick Construction Limited together with its ultimate parent company Caddick Group plc
20.Carillion JM Limited
21.Chase Norton Construction Limited together with its ultimate parent company Chase Midland plc
22.Clegg Construction Limited together with its ultimate parent company Clegg Group Limited formerly known as D E Clegg Holdings Limited
23.Connaught Partnerships Limited together with its ultimate parent company Connaught plc
24.Crown Point Maintenance Group Limited as the ultimate parent company of its dissolved subsidiary Greenwood Building Contractors (Mansfield) Limited, for Greenwood’s alleged infringements after 11 June 2002
25.Davlyn Construction Limited
26.Derwent Valley Construction Limited together with its ultimate parent company Chevin Holdings Limited
27.Dukeries Building Company Limited together with its ultimate parent company Gavco 159 Limited
28.Durkan Pudelek Limited together with its ultimate parent company Durkan Holdings Limited
29.E. G. Carter & Company Limited
30.E. Manton Limited
31.E. Taylor & Sons (Southwell) Limited, trading as Carmalor Construction
32.F. Parkinson Limited together with its ultimate parent company Mowbray Holdings Limited
33.Francis Construction Limited together with its ultimate parent company Barrett Estates Services Limited
34.Frank Galliers Limited together with its former ultimate parent company Frank Galliers Holdings Limited
35.Frudd Construction Limited
36.GAJ Construction Limited together with its current ultimate parent company GAJ (Holdings) Limited
37.G Carter Construction Limited
38.G. F. Tomlinson Building Limited together with its ultimate parent company G. F. Tomlinson Group Limited
39.G G Middleton and Sons Limited
40.G. & J. Seddon Limited together with its ultimate parent company Seddon Group Limited
41.GMI Construction Group plc together with (for alleged infringements after 6 February 2005) its current ultimate parent company GMI Construction Holdings plc
42.Geo Houlton & Sons Limited together with its ultimate parent company Geo Houlton & Sons (Holdings) Limited
43.George Law Limited together with its ultimate parent company Bosworth & Wakeford Limited
44.Greswolde Construction Limited together with its ultimate parent company Mantisson Limited
45.Hall Construction Group Limited
46.Harlow & Milner Limited
47.Harold Adkin & Sons (Sutton-In-Ashfield) Limited
48.Harper Group Construction Limited and J. Harper & Sons (Leominster) Limited together with their ultimate parent company Harper Group plc
49.Haymills (Contractors) Limited together with (for alleged infringements prior to 26 May 2004) its former ultimate parent company Corringway Conclusions plc and (for alleged infringements after 26 May 2004) its current ultimate parent company Haymills Group Limited
50.Henry Boot Construction (UK) Limited together with its ultimate parent company Henry Boot plc
51.Herbert Baggaley Construction Limited together with its ultimate parent company Baggaley Group Limited
52.Hill Bros. (Nottingham) Limited
53.Hobson & Porter Limited
54.Holroyd Construction Limited together with (for alleged infringements prior to 30 March 2005) its former ultimate parent company Holderness Investments Limited and (for alleged infringements after 30 March 2005) its current ultimate parent company Holroyd Construction Group Limited
55.Interclass Public Limited Company together with its ultimate parent company Interclass Holdings Limited
56.Interserve Project Services Limited together with its ultimate parent company Interserve plc
57.Irwins Limited and Jack Lunn (Construction) Limited together with their ultimate parent company Jack Lunn (Holdings) Limited
58.J. Guest Limited
59.J H Hallam (Contracts) Limited together with its ultimate parent company J H Hallam (R & J) Limited
60.J. J. & A. R. Jackson Limited
61.J. J. McGinley Limited, together with its former ultimate parent company McGinley Holdings Limited
62.John Cawley Limited
63.John Sisk & Son Limited together with its ultimate parent company Sicon Limited
64.K. J. Bryan (Builders) Limited
65.Kier Regional Limited together with its ultimate parent company Kier Group plc
66.Lemmeleg Limited together with its ultimate parent company Rok plc
67.Lindum Construction Co. Limited and Lindum Homes Limited together with their ultimate parent company Lindum Group Limited
68.Linford Group Limited together with its ultimate parent company F. & E. V. Linford Limited
69.Loach Construction & Development Limited
70.Lotus Construction Limited
71.Milward Construction (Belper) Limited
72.Morgan Ashurt plc formerly known as Bluestone Plc together with its ultimate parent company Morgan Sindall plc
73.North Midland Construction plc
74.P D H Developments Limited (formerly trading as G. Hurst & Sons (Contractors) Limited) together with its ultimate parent company G. Hurst & Sons Limited
75.P. Casey & Co. Limited together with its current ultimate parent company The Casey Group Limited
76.P. Waller Limited
77.Pearce Construction (Midlands) Limited together with its former ultimate parent company Crest Nicholson plc
78.Peter Baines Limited
79.Phoenix Contracts (Leicester) Limited
80.Piper Construction Midlands Limited together with its ultimate parent company Piper Securities Holdings Limited
81.Propencity Group Limited together with its wholly owned subsidiary companies, ISG Jackson Limited, ISG Regions Limited formerly known as ISG Totty Limited, ISG Totty Building Limited and Propencity Limited
82.Quarmby Construction Company Limited together with its ultimate parent company St James Securities Holdings Limited
83.Quarmby Construction (Special Projects) Limited together with its ultimate parent company Justgrade Limited
84.R Durtnell & Sons Limited together with its ultimate parent company R Durtnell & Sons (Holdings) Limited
85.R. G. Carter Limited, R. G. Carter Building Limited and R. G. Carter Construction Limited together with their current ultimate parent company R. G. Carter Holdings Limited
86.Richardson Projects Limited
87.Robert Bruce Construction Limited
88.Robert Woodhead Limited together with its ultimate parent company Robert Woodhead Holdings Limited
89.Robinson & Sawdon Limited
90.Shaylor Construction Limited
91.Simons Construction Limited and Wrights Construction (Lincoln) Limited together with their ultimate parent company Simons Group Limited
92.Sol Construction Limited together with its ultimate parent company Barkbury Limited
93.Speller-Metcalfe Limited
94.Spicers (Builders) Limited
95.Stainforth Construction Limited
96.Strata Construction Limited (formerly trading as Weaver)
97.T. & C. Williams (Builders) Limited
98.T. Denman & Sons (Melton Mowbray) Limited
99.Thomas Fish & Sons Limited together with its ultimate parent company Fish Holdings Limited
100.Thomas Long & Sons Limited together with its ultimate parent company Radford Holdings Limited
101.Thomas Vale Construction Plc together with its ultimate parent company Thomas Vale Holdings Limited
102.Thorndyke Limited
103.Try Accord Limited and Galliford Try Construction Limited together with their ultimate parent company Galliford Try plc
104.W. R. Bloodworth & Sons Limited
105.Wiggett Bros & Co Limited
106.Wildgoose Construction Limited
107.William Sapcote and Sons Limited together with its ultimate parent company Sapcote Holdings Limited
108.William Woodsend Limited
109.Willmott Dixon Construction Limited together with its ultimate parent company Willmott Dixon Limited
110.Wright (Hull) Limited together with its ultimate parent company T. Wright & Son (Holdings) Limited
111.Wygar Construction Co Limited together with its ultimate parent company Wygar (Holdings) Limited
112.York House Construction Limited