"The SSCI Charrette Series has been designed to provide new potential models of good practice for sustainable development, and will illustrate that high-quality, sustainable places can be delivered across the whole of Scotland."
"Three projects have been identified by the Scottish Government for inclusion in the Charrette Series from the eleven exemplars that were recognised as working towards 'Creating a Scottish Sustainable Community'. The selected projects are:
* Grandhome & Whitestripes
* Ladyfield
* Lochgelly
"Following the conclusion of the charrettes on-site, specific deliverables for each landowner will be identified, and a book will be published in early summer 2010, providing a detailed explanation of the processes and outcomes of the charrette series. The book will explore the challenges of development in Scotland in the post-war era and introduce the three sites as case studies for sustainable development in Scotland."
For more information click here
"...the Scottish government shelled out a reported £200,000 to import the expertise of Duany’s practice, Duany Plater-Zyberk & Company." For more information on that story click here
What the people thought of the Charrette here
Mr Duany has also responded to some critics of the Lochgelly development click here
APTSec has noted a comment regarding Tornagrain on the Central Fife Times click here
Friday, 23 April 2010
Tuesday, 20 April 2010
Village proposals
Hi folks
News on the front page of the 'Nairnshire Telegraph' this week - regarding development proposals for Croy village - may have implications, not only for Croy, but for other villages in the A96 Corridor as well.
First, have a look at these statements from the Main Issues Report (MIR) for the Highland-wide Plan Local Development Plan (MIR here):
Developer Contributions in the A96 Corridor
An important part of the A96 Corridor Framework is the developer contributions protocol. This identifies how the infrastructure improvements we require (including the improvements to the A96, the provision of schools and other facilities and the environmental improvements) will be funded by the private and the public sector. We remain committed to ensuring that a developer contributions protocol exists for the A96 Corridor, and this will be an essential part of any policy set out within the Proposed Plan when it is prepared. There are a number of issues with the levels of these developer contributions however, not least the changed economic conditions and the need to more fully engage with our partner agencies like Transport Scotland. We are reviewing the developer contributions protocols to ensure that the delivery of infrastructure remains key to all development, and this work will inform the preparation of the proposed plan. The preferred option is: prepare a policy in our Proposed Plan which states that all of the development proposed in the expansion areas across the corridor will contribute to a revised developer contributions protocol. The A96 Corridor Developer Contributions protocol will be an essential requirement for the development proposals in the A96 Corridor; and ensure that these developer contribution requirements are reflected in the investment plans of the Council and other infrastructure providers.
Smaller Settlements in the A96 Corridor
The A96 Corridor Framework highlights that there is scope for expansion of the smaller settlements of Auldearn, Culloden Moor, Croy, Ardersier and Cawdor in the corridor as part of our long term development strategy. A number of sites identified in the existing Local Plans remain available for housing or business development. The main pressure for development is at Cawdor, where there are proposals being drawn up for the expansion of the village. In other villages like Ardersier the emphasis is very much on local regeneration and enhancement of community facilities. The role of these, and indeed any other proposals that come forward, must be considered as part of the development strategy and included within the Proposed Plan where appropriate.
'...preferred option...' (for small settlements)
identify the potential for growth of the smaller villages in the A96 Corridor areas set out in the A96 Framework; and
identify the appropriate scale of development that may be expected in these areas.
No 'reasonable alternatives' were identified with respect to this preferred option (despite the fact that Government Circular 1 2009, para 43, states with respect to an MIR that:
"...must also contain one or more reasonable alternative sets of proposals.")
Now, try taking a look at the A96 Growth Corridor Development Framework (A96 GCDF) - pages 33, 34, 35 and 36 (click here for document on THC web site)
The map on page 33 indicates 5 'development zones' in the A96 Corridor and appears to show that all the villages mentioned as 'Smaller Settlements in the Corridor in the MIR' (and many other areas as well) fall within what is described as a 'Central Development Zone'.
WRT the tables on pages 35 and 36 of the A96 GCDF:
The table on page 35 appears to show some 1885 units in the 'Central Zone' for the 30 years between 2011 and 2041 (although the table on page 40 gives 1955 units in the 'Central Zone' and the Scotia submission for Croy uses this 1955 figure). All development appears to be residential.
If there was an equivalent amount of development in each of the 5 named villages and no development anywhere else in this 'C Zone' then 1885/5= 377 houses in total in each place or roughly 12.5 houses per annum for 30 years (or approx 13 pa if 1955) Croy's 'share' over 10 years would be 130.
Scotia Homes' 'Representation Summary' requests that:
"The allocation in South West Croy should be phased to identify approximately 200 houses in the short term (2011-2016)"
However this appears to be contradicted by a statement at 6.9 of their submission:
"This may allow for up to 200 residential units delivered over a ten year period."
It is also worth remembering that when the public consultation took place on the A96 Corridor Masterplan in 2007 - before the recomendation to 'approve' it - the maps shown on the handout for the exhibition stated, "Limited expansion of Culloden Moor, Croy, Ardersier, Cawdor and Auldearn is also planned within the Corridor" and page 1 noted a population of 1000-2000 for the villages. At an occupancy of 2.1 this means only 952 units at the 2000 population figure, not 1955 units.
Pages 33 and 34 of the A96 GCDF also include statements about infrastructure delivery mechanisms for these 'Zones'.
The' Infrastructure Costs and Allocations' table on page 36 shows a figure of 29.1%/23.62m against Central for 'A96 dualling and by-passes' (A96 costs to be shared equally between public at private). This fact is referred to in the Scotia submission:
"The A96 Corridor Framework identifies significant costs associated with the provision of infrastructure in the Central area, of which Croy forms a part, and the delivery of sufficient effective housing land in the short term, medium and long term will be required to satisfy the potential requirements. "
So, just what will the Proposed Plan consider to be the 'appropriate scale' of development for these villages now? What is considered the right balance of growth?
More on this topic to follow.
(See also post on blog 01/01/2010 re Scotia Homes Ltd submission to the HwLDP for development at Croy village).
News on the front page of the 'Nairnshire Telegraph' this week - regarding development proposals for Croy village - may have implications, not only for Croy, but for other villages in the A96 Corridor as well.
First, have a look at these statements from the Main Issues Report (MIR) for the Highland-wide Plan Local Development Plan (MIR here):
Developer Contributions in the A96 Corridor
An important part of the A96 Corridor Framework is the developer contributions protocol. This identifies how the infrastructure improvements we require (including the improvements to the A96, the provision of schools and other facilities and the environmental improvements) will be funded by the private and the public sector. We remain committed to ensuring that a developer contributions protocol exists for the A96 Corridor, and this will be an essential part of any policy set out within the Proposed Plan when it is prepared. There are a number of issues with the levels of these developer contributions however, not least the changed economic conditions and the need to more fully engage with our partner agencies like Transport Scotland. We are reviewing the developer contributions protocols to ensure that the delivery of infrastructure remains key to all development, and this work will inform the preparation of the proposed plan. The preferred option is: prepare a policy in our Proposed Plan which states that all of the development proposed in the expansion areas across the corridor will contribute to a revised developer contributions protocol. The A96 Corridor Developer Contributions protocol will be an essential requirement for the development proposals in the A96 Corridor; and ensure that these developer contribution requirements are reflected in the investment plans of the Council and other infrastructure providers.
Smaller Settlements in the A96 Corridor
The A96 Corridor Framework highlights that there is scope for expansion of the smaller settlements of Auldearn, Culloden Moor, Croy, Ardersier and Cawdor in the corridor as part of our long term development strategy. A number of sites identified in the existing Local Plans remain available for housing or business development. The main pressure for development is at Cawdor, where there are proposals being drawn up for the expansion of the village. In other villages like Ardersier the emphasis is very much on local regeneration and enhancement of community facilities. The role of these, and indeed any other proposals that come forward, must be considered as part of the development strategy and included within the Proposed Plan where appropriate.
'...preferred option...' (for small settlements)
identify the potential for growth of the smaller villages in the A96 Corridor areas set out in the A96 Framework; and
identify the appropriate scale of development that may be expected in these areas.
No 'reasonable alternatives' were identified with respect to this preferred option (despite the fact that Government Circular 1 2009, para 43, states with respect to an MIR that:
"...must also contain one or more reasonable alternative sets of proposals.")
Now, try taking a look at the A96 Growth Corridor Development Framework (A96 GCDF) - pages 33, 34, 35 and 36 (click here for document on THC web site)
The map on page 33 indicates 5 'development zones' in the A96 Corridor and appears to show that all the villages mentioned as 'Smaller Settlements in the Corridor in the MIR' (and many other areas as well) fall within what is described as a 'Central Development Zone'.
WRT the tables on pages 35 and 36 of the A96 GCDF:
The table on page 35 appears to show some 1885 units in the 'Central Zone' for the 30 years between 2011 and 2041 (although the table on page 40 gives 1955 units in the 'Central Zone' and the Scotia submission for Croy uses this 1955 figure). All development appears to be residential.
If there was an equivalent amount of development in each of the 5 named villages and no development anywhere else in this 'C Zone' then 1885/5= 377 houses in total in each place or roughly 12.5 houses per annum for 30 years (or approx 13 pa if 1955) Croy's 'share' over 10 years would be 130.
Scotia Homes' 'Representation Summary' requests that:
"The allocation in South West Croy should be phased to identify approximately 200 houses in the short term (2011-2016)"
However this appears to be contradicted by a statement at 6.9 of their submission:
"This may allow for up to 200 residential units delivered over a ten year period."
It is also worth remembering that when the public consultation took place on the A96 Corridor Masterplan in 2007 - before the recomendation to 'approve' it - the maps shown on the handout for the exhibition stated, "Limited expansion of Culloden Moor, Croy, Ardersier, Cawdor and Auldearn is also planned within the Corridor" and page 1 noted a population of 1000-2000 for the villages. At an occupancy of 2.1 this means only 952 units at the 2000 population figure, not 1955 units.
Pages 33 and 34 of the A96 GCDF also include statements about infrastructure delivery mechanisms for these 'Zones'.The' Infrastructure Costs and Allocations' table on page 36 shows a figure of 29.1%/23.62m against Central for 'A96 dualling and by-passes' (A96 costs to be shared equally between public at private). This fact is referred to in the Scotia submission:
"The A96 Corridor Framework identifies significant costs associated with the provision of infrastructure in the Central area, of which Croy forms a part, and the delivery of sufficient effective housing land in the short term, medium and long term will be required to satisfy the potential requirements. "
So, just what will the Proposed Plan consider to be the 'appropriate scale' of development for these villages now? What is considered the right balance of growth?
More on this topic to follow.
(See also post on blog 01/01/2010 re Scotia Homes Ltd submission to the HwLDP for development at Croy village).
Monday, 19 April 2010
Candidate quizing
I had hoped to give out information on a couple of events planned to allow the voting public to quiz the election candidates . Since APTSec has just found out that the Inverness Chamber of Commerce pre-election debate will not take place there is now only one event that I know of which affords an opportunity to question the candidates.
This details of this event are:
7.30 on Monday May 3 at Hilton Church
ASK THE CLIMATE QUESTION
>
7.30 on Monday May 3 at Hilton Church
ASK THE CLIMATE QUESTION
Each candidate will get only 3 minutes to set out their environmental agenda and then it is over to the public to ask questions on environmental matters.
For more details please e mail APT.intouch@live.co.uk and I will forward your enquiry.
Does anyone have any details of other events which provide opportunities to quiz the candidates on (a) different topic(s)?
For more details please e mail APT.intouch@live.co.uk and I will forward your enquiry.
Does anyone have any details of other events which provide opportunities to quiz the candidates on (a) different topic(s)?
>
Wednesday, 14 April 2010
Sandown latest
This is the latest item available on the DPEA web pages regarding the Sandown Lands Planning Appeal, Nairn. It is the response of the Case Worker to a query from the the appellants planning consultants.
"Thanks for the email concerning the progress of the decision for planning appeal PPA-270-632. I understand the reporters are currently still writing the decision on this appeal but unfortunately have no information as when they are likely to have the decision ready for issue. Sorry. I can only suggest you check back with me in a few weeks when I hope to be in a better position to advise you."
Click here for original item on DPEA site.
According to the DPEA site, the Target date for this appeal was 21/04/2010. (The case details are here)
[DPEA - Directorate for Planning and Environmental Appeals. The Scottish Government]
"Thanks for the email concerning the progress of the decision for planning appeal PPA-270-632. I understand the reporters are currently still writing the decision on this appeal but unfortunately have no information as when they are likely to have the decision ready for issue. Sorry. I can only suggest you check back with me in a few weeks when I hope to be in a better position to advise you."
Click here for original item on DPEA site.
According to the DPEA site, the Target date for this appeal was 21/04/2010. (The case details are here)
[DPEA - Directorate for Planning and Environmental Appeals. The Scottish Government]
Monday, 12 April 2010
Good Planning Works!
I have always had a lot of time for Mr Morris of Planning Magazine; try his latest piece here (extract below)
"...the most common criticisms of planning are that it is slow, bureaucratic, blocks desperately needed development or undermines the economy. But as the Planning Advisory Service (PAS) asks this week, is this really the case?
Conventional wisdom usually leads to blanket perceptions that may be totally inaccurate. One of the biggest causes of disrepute is where developers jump over every conceivable hurdle to gain the backing of planning officers, only for members to throw out the application.
How many times have councillors gone against hundreds of thousands of pounds' worth of legal and professional advice on the grounds that they have "local knowledge"?
According to the PAS, however, the system is not quite the symbol of broken Britain that some would like to portray. Where clear and strong planning policies are in place, members are in little doubt about why particular decisions must be made. This gives developers that elusive quality called certainty.
Good planning works. Unfortunately, that is not a message the system's detractors want to hear."
"...the most common criticisms of planning are that it is slow, bureaucratic, blocks desperately needed development or undermines the economy. But as the Planning Advisory Service (PAS) asks this week, is this really the case?
Conventional wisdom usually leads to blanket perceptions that may be totally inaccurate. One of the biggest causes of disrepute is where developers jump over every conceivable hurdle to gain the backing of planning officers, only for members to throw out the application.
How many times have councillors gone against hundreds of thousands of pounds' worth of legal and professional advice on the grounds that they have "local knowledge"?
According to the PAS, however, the system is not quite the symbol of broken Britain that some would like to portray. Where clear and strong planning policies are in place, members are in little doubt about why particular decisions must be made. This gives developers that elusive quality called certainty.
Good planning works. Unfortunately, that is not a message the system's detractors want to hear."
Sunday, 11 April 2010
Freedom of candidates speech
Friday, 9 April 2010
Back from Easter Break
APTSec is finding it difficult to catch up with the planning stuff after visiting friends and relatives over Easter.
With an election fast approaching uppermost in the mind is:
Of all the politicians APTSec has contacted and spoken to on planning issues over the last few years:
Who has impressed me most and shown the clearest indication that they have the brains to grasp the issues and are genuinely acting in the public interest?
What does the written and verbal evidence to date show?
Well, that would be telling...My lips are sealed and it is between me and the ballot paper.
Views welcome
With an election fast approaching uppermost in the mind is:
Of all the politicians APTSec has contacted and spoken to on planning issues over the last few years:
Who has impressed me most and shown the clearest indication that they have the brains to grasp the issues and are genuinely acting in the public interest?
What does the written and verbal evidence to date show?
Well, that would be telling...My lips are sealed and it is between me and the ballot paper.
Views welcome
Where does the Council Spend its budget?
Budget Consultation (from THC web pages)
Click here to find out - pages 10 and 11.
Costs include (out of a total of 604m) :
Computer, Communications and Tech contract at 14.6m
Repayment of borrowing at £45.9m
Children and Education 235m
Social Work 109.5m
Roads / Transport 27.5 - road / winter maintenance and street cleaning forms a big part
Environmental Services 39m (approx) - includes waste disposal, street cleaning, burials, public toilets and environmental health.
Mix of other services 44m
Computer, Communications and Tech contract at 14.6m
Repayment of borrowing at £45.9m
Children and Education 235m
Social Work 109.5m
Roads / Transport 27.5 - road / winter maintenance and street cleaning forms a big part
Environmental Services 39m (approx) - includes waste disposal, street cleaning, burials, public toilets and environmental health.
Mix of other services 44m
'Savings' of 36m are needed
Will you be taking part in the consultation?
Thursday, 1 April 2010
Croy Village Developments
Scotia Homes has made a submission to the Main Issues Report for the Highland-wide Local Development Plan. This submission can be found hereIncluded in the submission is a letter advising that Scotia Homes will be progressing an application for Croy 'South West'. As a resident of Croy APTSec requested more information regarding this planning application from The Planning Authority. I felt it was appropriate to ask for detail, since no details of the application had been included with the submission but the submission was asking for land to be zoned to support this application.
Here is a brief summary of the answers I received:
Mr Watt was advised in a very informal meeting on 18/11/09 that any proposal for development of this scale should follow the Highland Council’s pre-application advice service as set out in the following link
Pre-Application Advice Service
As a recent post on this blog has revealed, this pre-application guidance indicates:
“There is a possibility that, under the Freedom of Information Act, The Council will be asked to provide information regarding inquiries for pre-application advice and copies of any advice provided or correspondence entered into. This information may only be withheld if its disclosure could prejudice commercial interests, inhibit the free and frank provision of advice or exchange of views during the planning process, or could prejudice the effective conduct of public affairs. Those seeking pre-application advice should provide a covering letter that sets out the reasons why, and for how long, any information relating to the case needs to remain confidential..."
I understand from Mr Hartland, Planning THC, that following the meeting on the 26/01/2010 Scotia Homes have requested, via e-mail, that the information they presented and the advice given by the Council remains confidential while legal discussions take place between Scotia Homes and the
landowner and that, "It is our assessment that, at this time, the information presented by Scotia Homes at the meeting and the advice subsequently offered is exempt from release under the Freedom of Information Act, given that its disclosure could prejudice commercial interests. Any developer promoting development of this scale requires to undertake pre-application consultation with the local community, at which time the information should be made available to the wider public."
APTSec is keen to find out from other members of the public whether they have had a similar experience. Please contact using apt e mail
"RIAS Criticise Planning Gain"
Latest from 'Urban Realm"
The Royal Incorporation of Architects have criticised the system of planning gain for “killing off” development. More here
The Royal Incorporation of Architects have criticised the system of planning gain for “killing off” development. More here
"Latest on Dev Plans" blog update
Further to comments on the Post of 17 March (thank you Nairnbairn for keeping the debate open on this issue).
A helpful member of THC Democratic Services staff assisted me in finding that there was indeed no live link to the committee paper APTSec needed regarding the responses to the last consultation on the Inverness Local Plan, ILP. She then kindly forwarded me a copy of the sought after report.
The report summarises the representations received in respect of the consultative draft of the Inverness Local Plan etc. More than 800 individual and consul tee responses were received raising some 2000 issues for consideration.
It is worth noting at that time that policy was to prevent loss of identity and overheating in the villages and strengthening of rural settlement patterns. The Plan directed that growth in communities under pressure "does not normally exceed 25% in any 10 year period".
The big question is, on this and other issues,
How much of a 'change' in terms of 'Policy' will we expect to find?
More on this very soon.
If anyone wants a copy of this report please e mail APT apt.intouch@live.co.uk
A helpful member of THC Democratic Services staff assisted me in finding that there was indeed no live link to the committee paper APTSec needed regarding the responses to the last consultation on the Inverness Local Plan, ILP. She then kindly forwarded me a copy of the sought after report.
The report summarises the representations received in respect of the consultative draft of the Inverness Local Plan etc. More than 800 individual and consul tee responses were received raising some 2000 issues for consideration.
It is worth noting at that time that policy was to prevent loss of identity and overheating in the villages and strengthening of rural settlement patterns. The Plan directed that growth in communities under pressure "does not normally exceed 25% in any 10 year period".
The big question is, on this and other issues,
How much of a 'change' in terms of 'Policy' will we expect to find?
More on this very soon.
If anyone wants a copy of this report please e mail APT apt.intouch@live.co.uk
Wednesday, 31 March 2010
Latest news on Development Plans
Highland-wide Local Development Plan
(Latest from the Council's Development Plan Scheme)
15 WEEK PUBLIC CONSULTATION ON PROPOSED PLAN AND ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT STARTING JUNE 2010
CHANGE AND REVIEW PLAN FOLLOWING CONSULTATION SEPT-NOV 2010
SCOTTISH MINISTERS EXAMINE PLAN JAN-MAR 2011
PUBLISH POST EXAMINATION CHANGES, MAR 2011
ADOPT AND PUBLISH PLAN AND ACTION PLAN MAY 2011
Make sure your views on the future of the Highlands are known by commenting on the Proposed HwLDP during the consultation period!
CHANGE AND REVIEW PLAN FOLLOWING CONSULTATION SEPT-NOV 2010
SCOTTISH MINISTERS EXAMINE PLAN JAN-MAR 2011
PUBLISH POST EXAMINATION CHANGES, MAR 2011
ADOPT AND PUBLISH PLAN AND ACTION PLAN MAY 2011
Make sure your views on the future of the Highlands are known by commenting on the Proposed HwLDP during the consultation period!
Delivering Major Developments - A Pre-Application Guide
Extract:
The Highland Council is committed to the creation of sustainable communities to ensure a balanced population growth and economic development across the area and to deliver a fairer and healthier Highlands.
To assist the delivery of these aims, and in line with the requirements of the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006, we have put in place new processes for dealing with major applications. The guidance outlines the procedures The Highland Council will adopt to provide effective and early pre-application advice to developers in the Highland area.
Regulations defining what a major development is have been issued by the Scottish
Government and came into force on the 6th April 2009.
Part of Disclaimer:
There is a possibility that, under the Freedom of Information Act, The Council will be asked to provide information regarding inquiries for pre-application advice and copies of any advice provided or correspondence entered into. This information may only be withheld if its disclosure could prejudice commercial interests, inhibit the free and frank provision of advice or exchange of views during the planning process, or could prejudice the effective conduct of public affairs. Those seeking pre-application advice should provide a covering letter that sets out the reasons why, and for how long, any information relating to the case needs to remain confidential.
For more information click here (HwLDP blog post) and here
Also on the HwLDP blog is an item on the new Development Plan Scheme 2010 click here
[The Development Plan Scheme sets out how Highland Council will be preparing plans for
using new land over the next year. It states:
"This document makes it easier for you to find out how far we have developed our plans and how you can get involved."!]
The Highland Council is committed to the creation of sustainable communities to ensure a balanced population growth and economic development across the area and to deliver a fairer and healthier Highlands.
To assist the delivery of these aims, and in line with the requirements of the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006, we have put in place new processes for dealing with major applications. The guidance outlines the procedures The Highland Council will adopt to provide effective and early pre-application advice to developers in the Highland area.
Regulations defining what a major development is have been issued by the Scottish
Government and came into force on the 6th April 2009.
Part of Disclaimer:
There is a possibility that, under the Freedom of Information Act, The Council will be asked to provide information regarding inquiries for pre-application advice and copies of any advice provided or correspondence entered into. This information may only be withheld if its disclosure could prejudice commercial interests, inhibit the free and frank provision of advice or exchange of views during the planning process, or could prejudice the effective conduct of public affairs. Those seeking pre-application advice should provide a covering letter that sets out the reasons why, and for how long, any information relating to the case needs to remain confidential.
For more information click here (HwLDP blog post) and here
Also on the HwLDP blog is an item on the new Development Plan Scheme 2010 click here
[The Development Plan Scheme sets out how Highland Council will be preparing plans for
using new land over the next year. It states:
"This document makes it easier for you to find out how far we have developed our plans and how you can get involved."!]
Monday, 29 March 2010
Welsh Council withdraws plan
Interesting item from 'Planning Daily' electronic newsletter:
Cardiff Council has voted to withdraw its Local Development Plan following criticism from the Welsh Assembly Government.
In a statement the council said: "Legal Counsel has advised that given the magnitude of the concerns raised that it is evident the plan would not be recommended for adoption and that it is highly unlikely that the Inspectors will try to overcome the concerns by recommending modifications to the plan given their significance.
The move will see Cardiff Council revert to the last adopted Local Development Plan from 1996.
More here and here
Cardiff Council has voted to withdraw its Local Development Plan following criticism from the Welsh Assembly Government.
In a statement the council said: "Legal Counsel has advised that given the magnitude of the concerns raised that it is evident the plan would not be recommended for adoption and that it is highly unlikely that the Inspectors will try to overcome the concerns by recommending modifications to the plan given their significance.
The move will see Cardiff Council revert to the last adopted Local Development Plan from 1996.
More here and here
THC Meeting Rules
Extract
Standing Orders of The Highland Council Relating to the Conduct of Meetings - made by the Highland Council on 29 October 2009
Click here to view the Standing orders on The Highland Council web site (These Standing Orders will apply and have effect on and after 29 October 2009. )
Information provided further to a post on the 'Gurn'
Standing Orders of The Highland Council Relating to the Conduct of Meetings - made by the Highland Council on 29 October 2009
Click here to view the Standing orders on The Highland Council web site (These Standing Orders will apply and have effect on and after 29 October 2009. )
Information provided further to a post on the 'Gurn'
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)