What could help, who could lead and how to tell whether it works. These proposals respond to the evidence; they are separate from the council’s actual commitments.
Proposal
Make reopened landmarks and parks useful for local people
The Castle Experience has officially opened, and refurbished Bught Park and Northern Meeting Park have reopened.
These are completed local assets. Their benefit to residents depends on access, programming and maintenance as well as visitor numbers.
Who could lead: Highland Council; operated by High Life Highland; Highland Council.
- Start now
Make current access arrangements, prices where relevant and community-use opportunities clear for each site.
- Over the next few years
Coordinate local events and activities with accessible journeys and the parks’ regular sport and recreation uses.
- Over the longer term
Review resident participation and upkeep, alongside the attractions’ visitor and operating performance.
How to judge progress
Starting point: Inverness Castle Experience: Official opening reported. Bught Park and Northern Meeting Park improvements: Refurbished parks officially reopened.
Measure: Resident participation, accessible sessions and events, facility condition and running costs.
Trade-off: Visitor income and major events can support facilities but must be balanced with affordable local use and ordinary access to parks.
Cost: No costed delivery assessment has been established here. These are proposed sequences, not funded promises or completion deadlines.
Inverness Castle Experience →
Bught Park and Northern Meeting Park improvements →
Proposal
Keep the route from worker housing to permanent homes visible
Harbour Road’s initial worker accommodation and its intended permanent housing are different delivery stages.
Proposed response: publish the hand-back conditions and next planning steps so temporary capacity is not mistaken for permanent affordable homes.
Evidence
Who could lead: The Highland Council, SSEN Transmission and Balfour Beatty.
- Start now
Confirm the site’s current stage, lease dates, local access arrangements and what must happen before hand-back.
- Over the next few years
Develop and consult on the permanent layout, housing tenures, costs and supporting services.
- Over the longer term
Report completed permanent homes and workspace separately from temporary worker beds.
How to judge progress
Starting point: Funding agreement announced 28 April 2026; initial worker-accommodation lease described as five years.
Measure: Lease and hand-back milestones; permanent planning decisions; occupied homes by tenure.
Trade-off: Temporary accommodation may help a construction programme, but it delays permanent use and cannot be counted as delivered social housing.
Cost: No costed delivery assessment has been established here. These are proposed sequences, not funded promises or completion deadlines.
Harbour Road: worker accommodation and later permanent development →
Proposal
Make room for homes people can afford
The average home price is £221,000 (July 2026) in Highland council area. This is about £25,000 higher than the Scotland average for the same month.
Housing costs matter most alongside earnings and the number of affordable homes available. A local average cannot tell us whether a particular household can afford its home.
Who could lead: The housing and planning authorities, housing associations and developers.
- Start now
Publish the local waiting list, temporary accommodation and affordable-home delivery figures together.
- Over the next few years
Test proposed housing sites against affordable-home need, access to work, school places and water capacity.
- Over the longer term
Check whether completed homes reduce unmet need, rather than counting planning permissions as delivery.
How to judge progress
Starting point: The average home price is £221,000 (July 2026) in Highland council area.
Measure: Affordable homes completed, households waiting, time in temporary accommodation, and rent compared with local earnings.
Trade-off: More homes can put pressure on infrastructure and land. Affordability requirements also affect development viability.
Cost: No costed delivery assessment has been established here. These are proposed sequences, not funded promises or completion deadlines.
Evidence: Average home price →
Harbour Road: worker accommodation and later permanent development →
Proposal
Connect local skills to local opportunities
31.2% of people aged 16 or over had a degree or higher (20 March 2022) in Highland council area. People aged 16+ with a degree or higher ranged from 21.3% in Cromarty Firth to 41.3% in Black Isle — a gap of 20 percentage points.
Qualifications show one part of the skills available locally. They do not show whether people have secure jobs or work that uses those skills.
Who could lead: Employers, colleges, universities and the relevant skills authority.
- Start now
Compare vacancies and employer needs with training available to local residents. Start by checking the different needs in Black Isle and Cromarty Firth; census differences are not proof of unmet demand.
- Over the next few years
Link training to real jobs, including routes for people without formal qualifications.
- Over the longer term
Track sustained employment and earnings after training, not just course starts.
How to judge progress
Starting point: 31.2% with a degree or higher; 20 March 2022. People aged 16+ with a degree or higher ranged from 21.3% in Cromarty Firth to 41.3% in Black Isle — a gap of 20 percentage points. 20 March 2022; 21 of 21 current wards have comparable figures.
Measure: Sustained jobs, earnings and training completion for residents who face barriers to work.
Trade-off: Training takes time and cannot create demand for jobs on its own. Qualifications are not a complete measure of ability.
Cost: No costed delivery assessment has been established here. These are proposed sequences, not funded promises or completion deadlines.
Evidence: People aged 16+ with a degree or higher →
Evidence: People aged 16+ with no qualifications →
Inverness Castle Experience →
Harbour Road: worker accommodation and later permanent development →
Proposal
Target safety work where problems repeat
Recorded-crime figures cover the whole Highland council area; they do not identify individual wards.
These are police-recorded crimes under Scottish counting rules. They cannot be ranked alongside the mapped incidents shown for other UK nations.
Who could lead: The local police force, council community safety team and relevant services.
- Start now
Check recurring places and categories alongside local police priorities and residents’ reports.
- Over the next few years
Test focused prevention and support, with a comparison period agreed before the work starts.
- Over the longer term
Publish whether problems fall, move elsewhere or return, and adjust the response.
How to judge progress
Crime evidence and coverage →
Starting point: Use the dated, complete periods shown in Crime and safety; keep anti-social behaviour separate.
Measure: Comparable recorded incidents, repeat victimisation and residents’ reported experience; never a single crude league table.
Trade-off: More reporting can increase recorded crime. Enforcement and support may work differently for different problems.
Cost: No costed delivery assessment has been established here. These are proposed sequences, not funded promises or completion deadlines.
Proposal
Turn published plans into visible progress
3 named local projects or plans have official evidence in this collection.
A published plan makes responsibilities and intentions easier to inspect. It does not prove that funding is secured or that promised benefits have arrived.
Who could lead: The named project owners and council scrutiny bodies.
- Start now
Put the scope, owner, funding position and next milestone in one public place.
- Over the next few years
Report delivery against the agreed scope and explain delays or changes.
- Over the longer term
Check the benefits residents actually receive after completion.
How to judge progress
Starting point: The dated stages in Projects; unknown costs and funding remain unknown.
Measure: Milestones met, costs against the approved budget, and measured outcomes after delivery.
Trade-off: Delivery reporting takes staff time, but a launch announcement alone cannot show value for money.
Cost: No costed delivery assessment has been established here. These are proposed sequences, not funded promises or completion deadlines.
Inverness Castle Experience →
Bught Park and Northern Meeting Park improvements →
Harbour Road: worker accommodation and later permanent development →
What still needs an answer
Delivery costs, current service capacity and residents’ experience need to be assessed before choosing a programme. The time bands describe a possible sequence, not promised delivery dates.
Project locations have not been matched to official ward boundaries. No ward-specific delivery claims are inferred.
Costs, funding and benefits are only reported where the selected official evidence states them; blank fields are not zero.
Harbour Road’s permanent housing numbers, tenure split, total cost and final delivery dates have not been verified. The contribution announced in April 2026 is not the total project budget.
