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

Tweet this!

Green gateway hotel plan turned down in Colchester
CELEBRATIONS are under way after an independent inspector turned down plans to build a hotel on a green gateway into Colchester.
Inspector Julia Gregory ruled a three-star hotel, with 87 beds, could not be built off Cymbeline Way, near a route used daily by tens of thousands of people.
Landowner, the Strategic Land Planning Trust, part of the Profitable Group, appealed after Colchester Council twice refused bids to build on the fields, following opposition from residents, conservationists and councillors. During a four-day hearing, the trust argued Colchester needed the hotel, and insisted it would not look out of place.
But, in her decision, Mrs Gregory dismissed both claims, saying there were other sites in Colchester where a similar hotel could be built, and saying it would be a “significant intrusion”.
She wrote: “This land forms part of a green and pleasant landscaped approach to Colchester along Cymbeline Way.
“The scale of the building would be far in excess of any others in the general area, where buildings are small and dispersed.”
Continued

The Profitable Group have 4 land investment sites in the UK . All four sites have run into development problems causing concerns to be raised in Singapore about the viability of the program to buy UK green belt or protected land and convert it for building. Profitable Group have recenty been added to the Monetary Authority of Singapore investor alert list.There have also been a number of news items related to investors expressing public concern.

Colchester Cherry Tree Grove – Failed planning application since 2008
Colchester Spring Grove – was declared non viable for development in 2005
Concorde Village Hounslow – subject of a freedom of information request and subsequently declared non-viable by Hounslow council and serious concerns raised in press
Nafferton The Ridings - when Profitable Plots were closed down in the UK in 2007 UK investors were offered a transfer from Nafferton to other sites or return of funds invested. Nafferton is subsequently still being promoted on the Profitable web site to Asian investors.

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

Tweet this!

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.

Tweet this!

Green Belt housing scheme promoted by footballers leaves investors in the red

Investors from the Far East have been left without a penny gain in four years after putting money into a “get rich quick” property scheme promoted by two former England football players.

A marketing campaign fronted by Bryan Robson, the former England captain, and Steve McMahon promised a 250 per cent return in three years if a gravel pit near Heathrow airport was developed for housing and leisure.

However, the site is on green belt land where housing development is banned.

Related Articles

• Towns battle for Green Belt
• Bryan Robson to coach Thailand

While Profitable Group, the Singapore-based property company behind the scheme, has made at least £47 million from the deal, nothing has yet materialised at the site – not even a planning application to build a single house.

The two former footballers, now living in the Far East, used their celebrity status to market the scheme on television across south-east Asia in 2006.

Profitable changed the name of the tract of land from Lower Feltham Lakes to Concorde Village for the purposes of the marketing drive.

But no development can take place unless a planning inspector can be persuaded to overrule the site’s green belt status against the wishes of Hounslow council, the local planning authority, which firmly opposes building there.

A spokesman for the council said: “We would only develop green belt land if there were very special reasons. We see no special reasons for doing so on this site.”

Profitable, of which Mr McMahon is commercial director, has bought four sites in Britain for a few million pounds and divided them into thousands of tiny plots which have been offered to investors, bringing in tens of millions for the company.

The Feltham site was bought from Taylor Woodrow (now Taylor Wimpey) for £3.2 million, then resold in small plots at £8,000 to £13,000 each to overseas investors, a practice known as “landbanking”.

The sales raised something between £50 million and £55 million. Investors will realise the cash when and if the land is redeveloped.

To try to develop the Feltham site, the company has now brought in two British lobbying and consulting firms to market the scheme and draw up plans for the development.

Chelgate, a Westminster lobbying company, has sought to counter the council’s opposition by devising a public consultation procedure, including the staging of an exhibition with five different ideas to develop the site for housing and leisure, to which 5,500 households were invited.

Chelgate’s deputy chairman is Nick Wood-Dow, an adviser to David Cameron and deputy chairman of the Conservative party’s environment council.

The other company working for Profitable is DLP Planning in Sheffield, which is seeking to make changes to a London-wide land-use plan in a move that would increase Hounslow’s housing target, forcing the borough to accept more new homes within its borders. However, the final plan will not be drawn up until 2012.

Mr Robson told The Sunday Telegraph: “I was paid to do a commercial TV advert to be shown on Singapore TV five years ago for Profitable Plots.

“I have not done anything for them since and I was unaware of any controversy over development of the land.”

Profitable declined to take questions and instead asked Chelgate and DLP Planning to reply on its behalf. Chelgate confirmed that a television campaign featuring the footballers had been used to promote the deal. The advertisement is still on Profitable’s website.

A Chelgate spokesman said: “Circulation of a TV advertisement showing land at Feltham… as offering an estimated return of 250 per cent in three years, was aired for a short period in 2006… such advertising has long since been withdrawn. Investments have been sold on a minimum 7 to 10-year horizon.”

Chelgate also said the company would repay anybody who wanted to drop out of the scheme. Its spokesman added: “No investors in the Lower Feltham land have exercised their right to sell.”

Link to original Telegraph Article

Tweet this!

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

Tweet this!

Approval for new homes in village

A plan to build more than 120 new homes in Fortrose in the Black Isle has been unanimously approved by councillors.

Construction company Tulloch Homes wants to develop the site at Ness Gap. Highland Council had received more than 500 objections to the proposal.

Members of Ross, Skye and Lochaber planning applications committee visited the site before holding a hearing in the village theatre.

Objections included fears the development would spoil the village.

Tulloch Homes sought agreement in principle for a phased development and full planning permission for 16 houses and 16 flats.

Highland Council planning officials had recommended that councillors approved both.

Tweet this!

Nairn development public enquiry commences.
Good article by Press and Journal’s two reporters Jonny Muir and Iain Ramage.

This application was turned down by the Councillors because  of their concerns?
Why are the same rules not put in place for all developments within the region.
Developments will happen, they have to. Increasing population demands require more homes and particulary affordable ones.
BUT time and time again we ask that infrastructure is put in place along with developments and not left to chance after the event when we know they will not happen!
The argument is that an influx of people will automatically bring new long-term growth  and sustainable growth for the local economy. That does not follow.

Public inquiry to begin into plans for 550 homes on edge of Nairn

Group appealing against council’s decision to reject £100m proposals due to infrastructure fears

By Iain Ramage and Jonny Muir

Published: 01/03/2010

A public inquiry begins tomorrow into a developer’s proposals for 550 homes at Sandown on the western edge of Nairn.

The hearing, expected to take five or six days, will consider Deveron Highland’s appeal against Highland Council’s rejection last May of its £100million plans.

Scottish Government reporter Malcolm Mahony will oversee the inquiry.

Councillors have registered concerns that Nairn’s existing infrastructure would be unable to cope with such a population influx.

Local councillor Sandy Park, the authority’s convener, has warned that services in the town are already “creaking at the seams”.

Deveron Highland spent two years and a six-figure sum developing the scheme in consultation with the council, whose rules demand that at least a quarter of the homes would have to be “affordable”.

The vision, including a business centre, community facilities and a wetland park, was opposed by local councillors, the Nairn Residents Concern Group and Nairn Golf Club, but has the support of Inverness Chamber of Commerce.

Following the rejection, Deveron claimed the decision sent out a negative message to other groups hoping to redevelop the A96 corridor between Inverness and Nairn.

Thousands of homes and upgrades have been earmarked for the 15-mile route.

Speaking last year, Deveron Highland managing director Gordon Ramsay said: “This development can provide long-term growth for Nairn and sustainable growth for the local economy.

benefit

“Local shops and businesses can benefit from the steadily-growing population this development will bring.”

Brian Lynch, a member of Nairn Residents Concern Group, said yesterday: “We want to support Highland Council’s unanimous dismissal of the application.

“We have made a strong case in our written submission to the reporter and we believe it to be independent and the view of many people that live in Nairn.”

Read more: http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/1626635#ixzz0guhyREKK

Tweet this!

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

Tweet this!

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.

Tweet this!