News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re: Keiser's Coul Links Project (Embo/Dornoch)
« Reply #1000 on: March 05, 2020, 03:13:05 PM »

in order for a course to be considered to be a 'true' links it must have a caravan park bordering it. This is what makes this decision all the more bizarre and unexpected after the developer went to such trouble to ensure using an existing caravan park rather than imposing a new one on to the foreshore.


It is why Balmedie or Ardfin will never be considered as proper links experiences. In fact it is probably the biggest factor preventing Bandon from offering a true links experience. You just can't properly appreciate links golf if you don't appreciate a good caravan park.





There actually IS a place at Bandon Dunes designated for RV [Recreational Vehicle = caravan] parking and use.  It was suggested as part of the master plan by Howard McKee, because so many people travel up and down the Pacific Coast Highway in RV's.  However, it is located back by the maintenance facility for Bandon and Pacific Dunes, not right out beside the golf courses.

Jon Wiggett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Keiser's Coul Links Project (Embo/Dornoch)
« Reply #1001 on: March 05, 2020, 03:33:23 PM »

in order for a course to be considered to be a 'true' links it must have a caravan park bordering it. This is what makes this decision all the more bizarre and unexpected after the developer went to such trouble to ensure using an existing caravan park rather than imposing a new one on to the foreshore.


It is why Balmedie or Ardfin will never be considered as proper links experiences. In fact it is probably the biggest factor preventing Bandon from offering a true links experience. You just can't properly appreciate links golf if you don't appreciate a good caravan park.





There actually IS a place at Bandon Dunes designated for RV [Recreational Vehicle = caravan] parking and use.  It was suggested as part of the master plan by Howard McKee, because so many people travel up and down the Pacific Coast Highway in RV's.  However, it is located back by the maintenance facility for Bandon and Pacific Dunes, not right out beside the golf courses.



 ;D ;D ;D

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Keiser's Coul Links Project (Embo/Dornoch)
« Reply #1002 on: March 05, 2020, 03:36:11 PM »
Us Yanks have standards to adhere too.  Can't left the riff raff be front and center!   ;D

Thomas Dai

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Keiser's Coul Links Project (Embo/Dornoch)
« Reply #1003 on: March 05, 2020, 03:53:30 PM »
Niall, I dont have specific proof for Scotland, but I am pretty sure many sit on sites that are as environmentally sensitive as Coul Links. But because the proposed use is caravan parks or low cost housing, then nobody sets out to find the environmental sensitivity.
The government does not, housing is votes. The greens do not, low cost housing is also close to their hearts. So the area is not sensitive because there is no grass roots effort to look for the sensitivity.
I have no doubt as well that several courses would get permission denied to extend a couple of holes into the areas where caravan parks exist, if these did not exist.
I am also pretty sure that had Mike Keiser never proposed building on this area, cattle would have continued to destroy it in a more severe manner than the golf course, without any green party/politician saying much.

Worth noting that many of these caravan sites originated before and after WW2 either as wooden family owned chalets and then developed later into fixed caravan sites run as businesses including larger holiday camp style facilities. This was back in the days before folks flew off to sunny climates for their holidays.


The locations of such sites were usually on dune land because it’s near the seashore for beach activities and because dune land was cheap being unusable for crop farming and difficult/expensive to build solid structure housing etc on.

The difficulty of building solid structure housing suitable for the GB climate and the necessary roadways and associated facilities is important in relation to dune land. Indeed, it’s the reason solid buildings never really developed within dune areas keeping instead to rocky or firmer footed areas nearby. Dune systems also have a habit of shifting and coastlines changing.

As the area at Coul intended for golf is essentially dune land I would imagine that the chances of solid structure housing ever being built on it is unlikely. And with more and more folks flying off to various parts of the world for their holidays etc I doubt there’ll be much demand for more caravans. Indeed many caravan sites and holiday camps in GB are seemingly in financial difficulty. And some of these caravan sites/holiday camps already have basic golf facilities within them, ie a golfing precedent, and as such may be potentially suitable to be taken over and redeveloped as say, um, links golf courses).

Atb

Marty Bonnar

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Keiser's Coul Links Project (Embo/Dornoch)
« Reply #1004 on: March 05, 2020, 04:13:33 PM »
Niall, I dont have specific proof for Scotland, but I am pretty sure many sit on sites that are as environmentally sensitive as Coul Links. But because the proposed use is caravan parks or low cost housing, then nobody sets out to find the environmental sensitivity.
The government does not, housing is votes. The greens do not, low cost housing is also close to their hearts. So the area is not sensitive because there is no grass roots effort to look for the sensitivity.
I have no doubt as well that several courses would get permission denied to extend a couple of holes into the areas where caravan parks exist, if these did not exist.
I am also pretty sure that had Mike Keiser never proposed building on this area, cattle would have continued to destroy it in a more severe manner than the golf course, without any green party/politician saying much.

Worth noting that many of these caravan sites originated before and after WW2 either as wooden family owned chalets and then developed later into fixed caravan sites run as businesses including larger holiday camp style facilities. This was back in the days before folks flew off to sunny climates for their holidays.


The locations of such sites were usually on dune land because it’s near the seashore for beach activities and because dune land was cheap being unusable for crop farming and difficult/expensive to build solid structure housing etc on.

The difficulty of building solid structure housing suitable for the GB climate and the necessary roadways and associated facilities is important in relation to dune land. Indeed, it’s the reason solid buildings never really developed within dune areas keeping instead to rocky or firmer footed areas nearby. Dune systems also have a habit of shifting and coastlines changing.

As the area at Coul intended for golf is essentially dune land I would imagine that the chances of solid structure housing ever being built on it is unlikely. And with more and more folks flying off to various parts of the world for their holidays etc I doubt there’ll be much demand for more caravans. Indeed many caravan sites and holiday camps in GB are seemingly in financial difficulty. And some of these caravan sites/holiday camps already have basic golf facilities within them, ie a golfing precedent, and as such may be potentially suitable to be taken over and redeveloped as say, um, links golf courses).

Atb


Apropos of nothing at all, I remember hearing a story back in the 70s, that before all the development on the Spanish Costas, the old fathers used to bequeath all the good farming land to the favoured sons and the idiot wastrels got given the beaches.
Probably apocryphal, but hilarious nonetheless!
 ;D
F.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2020, 04:52:12 PM by Marty Bonnar »
The White River runs dark through the heart of the Town,
Washed the people coal-black from the hole in the ground.

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Keiser's Coul Links Project (Embo/Dornoch)
« Reply #1005 on: March 05, 2020, 06:43:54 PM »
... Indeed many caravan sites and holiday camps in GB are seemingly in financial difficulty. And some of these caravan sites/holiday camps already have basic golf facilities within them, ie a golfing precedent, and as such may be potentially suitable to be taken over and redeveloped as say, um, links golf courses).

Atb

So MK needs to start buying up caravan parks. He can keep some of the fixed caravans as on course housing ala Perranporth.

"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

Thomas Dai

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Keiser's Coul Links Project (Embo/Dornoch)
« Reply #1006 on: March 06, 2020, 04:17:06 AM »
... Indeed many caravan sites and holiday camps in GB are seemingly in financial difficulty. And some of these caravan sites/holiday camps already have basic golf facilities within them, ie a golfing precedent, and as such may be potentially suitable to be taken over and redeveloped as say, um, links golf courses).
Atb
So MK needs to start buying up caravan parks. He can keep some of the fixed caravans as on course housing ala Perranporth.
It wouldn't hurt to look into it. Current and ex-MoD sites too.
atb

Niall C

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Keiser's Coul Links Project (Embo/Dornoch)
« Reply #1007 on: March 06, 2020, 06:22:23 AM »
Strong words.


http://read.nxtbook.com/global_golf_post/local/20200302_fsga/hopkins_col.html?utm_source=florida&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=dm-030220


I hadn't realised that John Hopkins had become a spin doctor ?! :(


Frankly Mr Warnock is being disingenuous in blaming Trump. The Balmedie decision was basically an abuse of power by a single politician and should never have been granted. The Embo decision was spot on and if Todd Warnock was truly surprised at the outcome then he either had piss poor consultants who didn't explain planning policy or he wasn't listening.


Niall

David_Tepper

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Keiser's Coul Links Project (Embo/Dornoch)
« Reply #1008 on: March 06, 2020, 03:46:22 PM »
Niall -

If the Planning Committee of the Highlands & Islands Council voted 17 to 1 in favor of the Coul Links project (as well as it being endorsed by the Dornoch Council and Visit Scotland), it would appear Todd Warnock was not the only one getting bad advice.

DT

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +2/-1
Re: Keiser's Coul Links Project (Embo/Dornoch)
« Reply #1009 on: March 06, 2020, 03:57:46 PM »

I hadn't realised that John Hopkins had become a spin doctor ?! :(


Frankly Mr Warnock is being disingenuous in blaming Trump. The Balmedie decision was basically an abuse of power by a single politician and should never have been granted. The Embo decision was spot on and if Todd Warnock was truly surprised at the outcome then he either had piss poor consultants who didn't explain planning policy or he wasn't listening.





There are lots of financial pressures on semi-retired golf writers in these cutthroat days for journalists.

Niall C

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Keiser's Coul Links Project (Embo/Dornoch)
« Reply #1010 on: March 07, 2020, 07:09:46 AM »
Niall -

If the Planning Committee of the Highlands & Islands Council voted 17 to 1 in favor of the Coul Links project (as well as it being endorsed by the Dornoch Council and Visit Scotland), it would appear Todd Warnock was not the only one getting bad advice.

DT


David


You'll find that local councillors are politicians - there's a surprise ! And like most politicians they do what is expedient to them, and often that means going with those that shout loudest on contentious applications. Otherwise they happily tend to go with officers recommendations.


National politicians should be above all that but sadly Alex Salmond couldn't help himself. That however shouldn't hide the fact planning policy clearly pointed to a refusal of the application at Balmedie as it also did for the Embo application. That the second decision differed from the first shouldn't be seen as a mistake since as the saying goes, two wrongs don't make a right.


If the developers consultants were worth a toss they'd have explained that, and I'm sure they did. I suspect that the developers were gambling on the Trump gambit of drumming up as much support as possible and turning it into a popularity contest rather than a planning application. That was always going to be a gamble so how they could be shocked that they didn't get consent is beyond me.


Niall 

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Keiser's Coul Links Project (Embo/Dornoch)
« Reply #1011 on: March 07, 2020, 11:14:33 AM »
Niall,

As I see it, seems this was a missed opportunity because the proposal appeared to be best case scenario.

- Proven developer in Mike K with a well established track record of doing projects like this and getting it right.
- Proven course designers also with a lengthy resume of building natural, minimal impact, high quality golf courses
- Near unanimous buy in from the local and regional leadership
- Very high approval % from the local and regional citizens
- Developer willing to commit to conservation efforts in the immediate area.

Not that it was perfect, but i'm not sure how the proposal could have been improved....and yet still turned down.

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Keiser's Coul Links Project (Embo/Dornoch)
« Reply #1012 on: March 07, 2020, 11:27:13 AM »

Not that it was perfect, but i'm not sure how the proposal could have been improved....and yet still turned down.

More positive economic impact to lessen the blow of the environmental impact. Trump's (obviously for any who cared to seek out alternate opinions) falsified numbers won the day for him. If the Coul project has those sort of economic numbers things may have turned out differently. It's sort of catch 22. Make the project environmentally reasonable and it will likely fail the economic impact test. You know the rest. 

I think many are missing the planning big picture. The system worked if the presumption was for the protection of the land...which in this case it is. Most on this thread are looking at this case bass ackwards. That said, I still think the matter should have been decided by the local planning authority. If there is no national impact, let the local authority decide and the locals have to live with the decision.

Ciao
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Keiser's Coul Links Project (Embo/Dornoch)
« Reply #1013 on: March 07, 2020, 12:40:02 PM »
Sean,

I presumed an improvement would not include telling lies like Trump did when he grossly overstated the financial impact.

As for the environmental issue, seemed like the project was the best solution in both getting use of the land with the best financial impact and providing reasonable protection vs letting livestock have thier run on it.  Besides, its not like a golf course is a giant structural eyesore, do golf courses really offend the senses that much?  In most cases they seem to be supplemental in respect to the natural beauty, but i may be biased there.  ;)

Adrian_Stiff

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Keiser's Coul Links Project (Embo/Dornoch)
« Reply #1014 on: March 07, 2020, 12:50:04 PM »
Niall,

As I see it, seems this was a missed opportunity because the proposal appeared to be best case scenario.

- Proven developer in Mike K with a well established track record of doing projects like this and getting it right.
- Proven course designers also with a lengthy resume of building natural, minimal impact, high quality golf courses
- Near unanimous buy in from the local and regional leadership
- Very high approval % from the local and regional citizens
- Developer willing to commit to conservation efforts in the immediate area.

Not that it was perfect, but i'm not sure how the proposal could have been improved....and yet still turned down.
None of that over-rides the rules though. The planning policies offer guidance what you can do and what you can't. The rationale is that once you have over-riden a rule it can be used in another application as 'case law'. There are a few tricks you can do but this application missed those.
A combination of whats good for golf and good for turf.
The Players Club, Cumberwell Park, The Kendleshire, Oake Manor, Dainton Park, Forest Hills, Erlestoke, St Cleres.
www.theplayersgolfclub.com

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Keiser's Coul Links Project (Embo/Dornoch)
« Reply #1015 on: March 07, 2020, 01:00:25 PM »
Niall,

As I see it, seems this was a missed opportunity because the proposal appeared to be best case scenario.

- Proven developer in Mike K with a well established track record of doing projects like this and getting it right.
- Proven course designers also with a lengthy resume of building natural, minimal impact, high quality golf courses
- Near unanimous buy in from the local and regional leadership
- Very high approval % from the local and regional citizens
- Developer willing to commit to conservation efforts in the immediate area.

Not that it was perfect, but i'm not sure how the proposal could have been improved....and yet still turned down.
None of that over-rides the rules though. The planning policies offer guidance what you can do and what you can't. The rationale is that once you have over-riden a rule it can be used in another application as 'case law'. There are a few tricks you can do but this application missed those.

Adrian,

At the risk of sounding cliche, I won't retort with the "rules were made to be broken" shtick.

But they should be balanced, and regularly evaluated.  I agree with the environmentalist movement in general, but sounds like they've had a bit of a over-reaction knee jerk on this one, especially given how thoughtful this one appears to be and the near unanimous buy-in at the local and regional level.  Seems they are setting a dubious precedent with a fair amount of potential for unintended consequences...over a few dozen acres of land.

Ian Mackenzie

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Keiser's Coul Links Project (Embo/Dornoch)
« Reply #1016 on: March 07, 2020, 01:11:59 PM »
Niall,

As I see it, seems this was a missed opportunity because the proposal appeared to be best case scenario.

- Proven developer in Mike K with a well established track record of doing projects like this and getting it right.
- Proven course designers also with a lengthy resume of building natural, minimal impact, high quality golf courses
- Near unanimous buy in from the local and regional leadership
- Very high approval % from the local and regional citizens
- Developer willing to commit to conservation efforts in the immediate area.

Not that it was perfect, but i'm not sure how the proposal could have been improved....and yet still turned down.


Good summary. Kalen. I would add:


1. The town in which the course was to be built invested their own capital in the project.
2. Promise to not build homes, lodging or another course.


I think something that may have been considered was to pull the routing west a bit off as much of the SSSI portion as possible. Dont know if that would have mattered in the end.


What also was lost in all of this was the plan to build a real driving range and practice area across the road (west) of the course on current cattle grazing land. RDGC/Coul players/members/teachers/pros/students would have all had access to it.


Further insult was that the second Trump course and housing plans was announced while the Scottish govt was considering Coul.


I just hope that those who so passionately opposed the project will now equally direct their passions at truly preserving the site. For if they do not, they will have openly raised their hands - including some on this site -and invited all  to call them overt and opportunistic hypocrites.

Ally Mcintosh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Keiser's Coul Links Project (Embo/Dornoch)
« Reply #1017 on: March 07, 2020, 01:43:34 PM »
Ian,


If they pulled the course west (completely) off the SSSI then it would have absolutely made a difference. The trouble is you have a weaker course and in the end, it’s really difficult to accept that for most developers and architects.


I remember Mike Wood (GCA and environmentalist) offered up an alternative routing at Balmedie that still used a lot of dune land, just not the mobile and unusual dunes. Clearly not accepted as a possible solution


Best example was probably at Doonbeg where they had to exclude 55 acres of the best land due to SAC flora and fauna.






David_Tepper

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Keiser's Coul Links Project (Embo/Dornoch)
« Reply #1018 on: March 07, 2020, 02:12:44 PM »
A question for Adrian & Niall -
 
Are the elected local/regional/national governments in Scotland obliged by law to accept the judgements of their planning staffs of civil servants at face value and being the final word? Do they have the legal authority to alter/amend or even reject those judgements?

Lou_Duran

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Keiser's Coul Links Project (Embo/Dornoch)
« Reply #1019 on: March 07, 2020, 03:01:54 PM »

Lou,


I am afraid your assertions in paragraph 4 are so far off the mark it is well..... The overwhelming majority of the population in the area of Balmedie(as well as the rest of Scotland) was against this project. And where is the benefit to the local and national economy?


Jon


My apologies for the delay.  I am trying to go on a long trip and the events of the last couple of weeks haven't helped.


If you have time, please peruse the several threads on TI-B, most which contain mentions on widespread local support.  There is even a comment in one where you note that local support is strong (I found it last week, but can't locate the thread right now- I think it was dated before 2010).  A thread titled "No Trump ?" has several references (replies 17,18,20,28,39,41,46).


Of course, this is all moot now.  TI-B is fantastic.  The second course and plans for 550 luxury homes do not suggest that the project has been abandoned.  "Destruction" of the dunes system is hyperbola at the highest level.  Mr. Ford has maximized his "Green" credentials.  And with the Coul Links decision, Scottish politicians, self-appointed environmental activists, and anti-growth/(other) people suck types can take solace that they can still stop "the rich" from building their playgrounds.  Of course, we know from this site that 50, 100, 200 jobs mean nothing.       


 

Ian Mackenzie

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Keiser's Coul Links Project (Embo/Dornoch)
« Reply #1020 on: March 07, 2020, 03:39:12 PM »

I would seriously be somewhat empathetic to the opposing view here save for one annoying little fact:


GOLF TOURISM IS THE #1 F**KING "INDUSTRY" IN THE COUNTRY....for f**k's sake....!


That's like:


1. Gary Indiana in the 1970's voting down a new steel mill.
2. London, England voting against Indian food and fish n chip restaurants.
3. Amsterdam cracking down on coffee shops and the red light district.
4. Russia telling a new Vodka distillery to get stuffed.
5. Canada saying you can't cut down these trees for timber or use this river to generate power for the US northeast.


I know, I know...let's not kill Mother Earth.
But, come on, the site at Coul was dying and NOT ONE SINGLE person who opposed the project gave a rat's ass about Coul prior to 2015.

Lou_Duran

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Keiser's Coul Links Project (Embo/Dornoch)
« Reply #1021 on: March 07, 2020, 03:42:51 PM »
Lou,


The summary of the ruling indicates that they did consider the economic benefits but decided against the project anyway. 

"Overall Summary of Findings

26. In terms of sustainable development, the reporters conclude that the proposal is consistent with Scottish Planning Policy’s (SPP) strong support for economic growth, rural development, growing communities and tourism, a key growth sector in the Scottish economy. However, because of the potential significant adverse effects on protected habitats and species at Coul Links, the reporters consider that the proposed development runs contrary to SPP’s emphasis on protecting natural heritage sites and world-class environmental assets. Therefore the reporters do not consider that it would contribute to sustainable development. Overall the reporters consider that the proposed development is contrary to the development plan, as the likely detriment to natural heritage is not outweighed by the socio-economic benefits of the proposal. Scottish Ministers agree with these findings.

27.   Para 212 of SPP sets out that development that affects a SSSI should only be permitted where the objectives of designation and the overall integrity of the area will not be compromised; or where any significant adverse effects on the qualities for which the area has been designated are clearly outweighed by social, environmental or economic benefits of national importance. Scottish Ministers agree with the Reporters findings that the local and regional socio-economic benefits of the development do not justify the adverse effects on the qualities of designation of the SSSI, SPA and Ramsar.
"

Just a reminder that Trump has created relatively few jobs at Balmedie -  77 staff, 41 in food, beverage and accommodation,10 in golf operations, 15 in grounds, and 11 in administration. No hotel and no housing so far.  Coul would likely have been less in the way of socio-economic benefits than Trump Balmedie.

As to whether there would have been economic benefit in the Dornoch area, that may well have been true.  But, would that have been at the expense of other areas of Scotland.  Or, did you think that Coul would have generated net new golf tourism to Scotland on its own accord.

If you had seen Balmedie from before the course, you would know that it is an entirely different ecological site. I don't recall Coul looking anything like this when you and I looked over the fence a couple of years ago.  And this is a view of one of the smaller moving dunes at Balmedie.




It is impossible to do a proper cost/benefit analysis when the no-growth environmentalist side can set the said costs and benefits to whatever arbitrary levels will support their conclusion.  The precautionary principle is being widely applied beyond what was previously known as "global warming" and now positioned as the inarguable "climate change". 


We will disagree on whether the course "destroyed" the dunes.  I found the whole area highly appealing and look forward to returning when I have more time.  BTW, I can't remember of ever being treated with greater courtesy.  There were a number of non-golfing tourists looking at the property, getting their pictures taken, and having tea and biscuits in the restaurant.  Not everyone has the highly negative opinion of its owner or the club as you and many others do.


Re: Coul Links, my several hours on the site changed my first impression from the road, but only moderately.  If it is an important site of scientific interest, then most of coastal Scotland is as well.


The site is a mess of debris, neglect, weeds and other invasive vegetation.  It was nearly devoid of people and but for a few birds including one grouse, and a small deer, one sees multiples of walkers and wildlife each round at Royal Dornoch.


Given their work at Trinity Forest, a site that was perhaps as unattractive, I was looking forward to C & C's transformation of CL.  Though with not much in elevation changes, the land probably has enough movement and easy to mold material that these experts could build an entertaining links.  I don't know how or if they planned to bring the sea into view, a great attribute of RD, but perhaps this wasn't that important.


I am very disappointed with the decision so I can understand Todd W's "despair".  It will definitely mean that I will stay fewer nights in the future, as having a second course which approaches RD in quality and interest was important to me.

Lou_Duran

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Keiser's Coul Links Project (Embo/Dornoch)
« Reply #1022 on: March 07, 2020, 04:00:00 PM »
A question for Adrian & Niall -
 
Are the elected local/regional/national governments in Scotland obliged by law to accept the judgements of their planning staffs of civil servants at face value and being the final word? Do they have the legal authority to alter/amend or even reject those judgements?


I must assume that these are rhetorical questions.  Of course they have the authority to do as they did in both cases.  Their survival is also subject to public opinion which, as you know, can be molded with the assistance of the dominant media and cultural organs.


The CL decision was highly political, but the national consequences are probably little.  Some can blame Trump, but he had nothing to do with the lack of backbone at the federal level.  Too bad, many, many people will lose a little from this decision; a considerable number will lose a lot.  There should be some really good prices for real estate in Dornoch.  If I was only 20 years younger!

Bill Gayne

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Keiser's Coul Links Project (Embo/Dornoch)
« Reply #1023 on: March 07, 2020, 04:20:27 PM »

There actually IS a place at Bandon Dunes designated for RV [Recreational Vehicle = caravan] parking and use.  It was suggested as part of the master plan by Howard McKee, because so many people travel up and down the Pacific Coast Highway in RV's.  However, it is located back by the maintenance facility for Bandon and Pacific Dunes, not right out beside the golf courses.


We pulled into Bandon in a RV and they directed us to the RV parking lot and sent over a golf car for us. It worked out perfectly.

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Keiser's Coul Links Project (Embo/Dornoch)
« Reply #1024 on: March 07, 2020, 05:02:17 PM »
A question for Adrian & Niall -
 
Are the elected local/regional/national governments in Scotland obliged by law to accept the judgements of their planning staffs of civil servants at face value and being the final word? Do they have the legal authority to alter/amend or even reject those judgements?

David

Unless an application is delegated to a case officer, which is very common for small applications, the local authority will have some mechanism whereby elected members make the decision. Case officers make recommendations. Even for delegated cases it is possible for the local council member to request an application is considered by what is usually a planning committee comprised of elected members.

Ciao
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing