Flamingo Land's Lomond Banks. The controversy explained

The company behind the proposal, Lomond Banks, a subsidiary of theme-park operator Flamingo Land, describes the proposal as “a world-class family holiday village, taking inspiration from Center Parcs and other nature-orientated adventure parks in Scotland”.

Five years on from the rejection of the first application, which became the most objected-to planning application in Scottish history, it is still dogged by backlash and criticism, and still gathering objections. But what exactly is the plan? Why are people objecting to it? And why are tensions so high?

What is actually planned for the site?

What Lomond Banks calls a “world-class family tourist destination”, which includes an apartment-hotel, budget hotel, a total of up to 104 self-catering holiday lodges of various sizes and locations, the conversion of derelict Woodbank House and its buildings into self catering holiday properties, a “waterpark/leisure pool/spa”, restaurants, retail areas, a craft brewery visitor attraction, external activity areas, a monorail and picnic and barbecue areas.

So is it actually a theme park?

The developers, certainly, do not see it as a theme park, nor is it what most people would describe as such, though it is being developed by a company which is a subsidiary of Yorkshire theme park operator, Flamingo Land. According to the company’s website, the plan represents “the desire for a change in direction from its existing portfolio of theme parks to create a new accommodation led resort bespoke to the natural habitat”.

But those campaigning against it regard it as a "mega-resort" and see the scale of the park as an issue. Lynne Somerville, chair of the Balloch and Haldane Community Council, for instance objects to “the sheer size of the development”.

For Ross Greer, the West of Scotland Green MSP who has fought the development from the start size is also the prime issue. “This is just way too big. It would bring far too many cars onto the road. It would require far too much disruption of the natural environment. The scale is going to push local community out of their green space.”

Artist's impression of Lomond Banks

“This is a massive development. This would overwhelm and define Balloch. Balloch would be a town that basically revolves around the Flamingo Land Lomond Banks resort and that has all sorts of knock-on implications.”

It may not be a theme park, but is it a waterpark?

The water park is certainly an element of the development that many critics draw attention to as inappropriate. It's mentioned on the Lomond Banks website in a list that states  "Leisure / pool / water park / spa".

For Alannah Maurer, founder of Save Loch Lomond, this is one of the elements that make it seem inappropriate  “People don’t come to Loch Lomond  for a waterpark. The hypocrisy of a waterpark on Loch Lomond! It is a water park in its own right, a natural water park." 

However, the plan is hardly Atlantis Aquaventure (the largest aquapark in the world). The project's community engagement lead, Fiona Robertson from Streets-UK, says: “I can only assume when people talk about a waterpark, they mean an indoor swimming pool at the hotel that’s planned for the Pierhead. That’s an important part of an all-year-round offer. A lot of the local businesses recognise that Loch Lomond is still a very seasonal destination and actually doesn’t have much in the way of family-focussed accommodation and that’s exactly what Lomond Banks is trying to deliver on.”

What’s the difference between this proposal and the last?

The site adjacent to the Pierhead has been revised “to be more in keeping with the natural landscape” and all development from the ancient woodland of Drumkinnon Woods has been removed. The loss of the woodland had been a key complaint by many against the first proposal. There is also to be an increased number of accommodation units on the Woodbank House site – from 48 to 83.

Why was the original proposal rejected?

Loch Lomond & The Trossachs National Park Authority recommended that the development plan  had "not demonstrated that there will be no adverse impacts on the character or integrity" of the existing asset.

It stated: "Two key elements of the application - proposals in Drumkinnon Wood and at the Pierhead area - would result in significant unacceptable impacts on the landscape, visual amenity, and trees and woodland.”

Artist's impression of Lomond Banks (Image: Lomond Banks)

Why are people objecting?

Objections range from the size and scale of the development to impacts on environment and biodviersity, loss of public spaces and possible detrimental impacts on the local community, or on their health and wellbeing, or increase in traffic.

For the locals, though, it’s the impact on daily lives and access to green space that is key. “It will take over the whole west side of Balloch, with no area left,” says Lynne Somerville, chair of Ballloch and Haldane Community Council. “That will impact at-risk groups – from those who are physically disabled, who can’t access the likes of Balloch park because of it being quite hilly, to parents of children who are on the spectrum.”

Artist's impression of Lomond Banks

What is the problem with the traffic?

“This is a development based on cars,” says Ross Greer. “They are going to create 372 car parking spaces. On summer days when it is nice weather the A82 already comes to a standstill. Trying to get up the west side of the loch is a massive challenge for visitors and for local residents. There are so many cars, campervans etc on the road. And this development would bring far more of them. The climate impact from that is obvious as well.”

However, community engagement lead for Lomond Banks, Fiona Roberston says: “The traffic impact assessment – which is a technical document that has to be submitted as part of the planning application – concluded that the traffic impact that Lomond Banks is going to have on the A82 is negligible. In spite of that conclusion, Lomond Banks  recognised the  local concerns and has made agreed to make a voluntary financial contribution to Transport Scotland to make improvements to Stoneymollan Roundabout.  West Dunbartonshire Council, who are the roads authority have not objected to this application. They are content.”

Are there other key issues?

Campaigners also point out that the area around Woodbank House is a flood risk. Initially, the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency submitted a holding objection, warning that it was not certain that proposed flood mitigation works, which would elevate lodges above the flood levels, would be feasible.

SEPA’s current position is “one of objection subject to modification" and Lomond Banks' response has been to point to a technical get-out, citing the fact that it is former industrial land.

Are campaigners against all development at the site? 

MSP Ross Greer emphasises that this is not a NIMBY campaign trying to prevent all development. “We’ve always talked about alternative development. It’s not we want it untouched. Bits of it should remain untouched. Drumkinnon woods primarily. Other bits of the site we do want to see developed..”

Locals are starting to put forward their own bid for parts of the site. Only last week, the Loch Lomond South Community Development Trust was set up for the purpose. Campaigners, however,  are concerned that, since previously an exclusivity agreement was in place between Scottish Enterprise and Flamingo Land/Lomond Banks there may still even now be an agreement that blocks this and their rights under Scotland's Community Empowerment Act. 

Is there an exclusivity agreement? And does it represent a barrier for the community?

There is no longer an exclusivity agreement between Scottish Enterprise and Flamingo Land/Lomond Banks, though there is a conditional missive, which was created for the second application. 

A Scottish Enterprise spokesman said: “Scottish Enterprise has had a legally-binding exclusivity agreement, and then latterly a legally-binding conditional missive, in place with the proposed developers since they were selected as the preferred bidder following an open marketing process for the site in 2015. During that process, no community interest was submitted.

“We have met with Balloch and Haldane Community Council to discuss their recent interest in the site and advised that any community asset transfer Request would be considered in line with the relevant legislation.”

For Alannah Maurer, founder of Save Loch Lomond, however, this provides insufficient clarity. She says:  "The conditional missive or exclusivity agreement has only ever been viewed in its heavily redacted form removing the opportunity for public scrutiny of this legal agreement between Scottish Enterprise and Flamingo Land.  It’s clearly in the public interest that such dealings concerning public land should be transparent."

What would the trust do with the site?

The Loch Lomond South Community Development Trust  is still drawing together ideas which it says will be chosen through a democratic process. Amongst them is that it would take over the visitor centre giving local's a hub for community activities and businesses. Other ideas mooted include an amphitheatre and a national water sports centre.

What about the jobs and economic impact?

The original application was for a development at an investment of £30 million, but this version two now comes with a price tag of £40 million. Lomond Banks claim it will deliver 200 jobs. The website also declares "£40 million invested in the local community", though this is clearly the entire figure invested in the development. 

Jim Paterson, the project’s development director, has said that Lomond Banks will not only “revitalise the gateway to Loch Lomond,” but offer an added boost to existing complementing businesses that already operate here and “provide numerous opportunities for those keen to work with a progressive and forward-thinking employer.”

Lynne Somerville and Alannah Maurer by the River Leven (Image: Colin Mearns)

But Lynne Somerville questions whether those 200 positions will bring employment to locals: “It’s only really offering the same type of jobs that the current operators in leisure and hospitality already struggle to fill." 

She also advocates: "We want inward investmen. SMEs and micro businesses will offer an alternative via the new community development trust that will seek to foster and are much better than larger, more geographically removed companies, for bringing about local renewal and economic regeneration, and community empowerment and wealth building opportunities."

READ MORE:

• Why Flamingo Land's Lomond Banks sparked record objections
• 'People continue to misrepresent by calling it Flamingo Land'
• Flamingo Land's Lomond Banks: the controversy from all sides

What is the view of Loch Lomond & the Trossachs National Park Authority?

Gordon Watson, Chief Executive at Loch Lomond & The Trossachs National Park Authority, said: “It is vital to stress that no decision has been taken on whether to approve or refuse this planning application and the inflammatory language and misleading commentary we have seen from some quarters in recent months suggesting otherwise is entirely unhelpful.  

“We very much understand the significant public interest and strength of feeling around this planning application. As such, I want to offer my assurance that due process is being followed to the letter and I would strongly urge those with conflicting views on the application to respect that process and avoid making unfounded accusations that seek to undermine the process.  

“The facts are important here.  Planning authorities cannot decline to consider an application because it could be considered controversial. Like all planning authorities, we are legally required to process and consider all applications we receive.  It is then our duty to consider the merits of those applications, considering established planning policy, all consultation responses and any other material considerations. 

“The recently reformed Balloch and Haldane Community Council is an important statutory consultee in this process and we have consistently engaged with them to ensure they understand the planning process. Our planning team met with them on 19th June, have answered questions via email and will meet with them again later this month to help explain the next steps in this process. The views they have expressed will be considered as part of the decision on whether to approve or refuse the planning application.

“The National Park Authority determines hundreds of applications every year, balancing the need to safeguard the environment and landscapes, while supporting the social and economic development of its communities. We are approaching this planning application in exactly the same way."

“Recent planning decisions taken by the National Park Authority demonstrate our commitment to achieving that balance. For example, the National Park Authority Board refused an application for a marine fish farm below Beinn Reithe, Loch Long, concluding that the risk of an escape of farmed fish, together with significant landscape, seascape and visual issues, meant the proposed development would not be appropriate in a National Park. 

“A previous planning application from the Lomond Banks applicant was also recommended for refusal, prompting it to be withdrawn before the Board Meeting to take a decision could take place.

“Assessment of this planning application continues and a decision on whether to approve or refuse the application will be taken by the National Park Authority Board on Monday 16th September.”