May 28 2019

Developers behind the £30m leisure development in Balloch have come out fighting after their proposals drew a record volume of complaints, with over 55,000 objections (and counting) raised with Loch Lomond & the Trossachs National Park.

Undeterred Lomond Banks are promoting a raft of planned improvements contained in their application which includes improved footpaths, landscaping and green spaces in addition to more contentious elements such as hotels and apartments.

Director Andy Miller said: “Our proposals will improve biodiversity through the creation of new habitat and strengthening old habitat.

“We have put forward a woodland development management plan so that existing woodland is properly managed and wherever possible improved, improving the natural environment both for wildlife and future generations to enjoy.

“Lomond Banks will be a family holiday village and not a theme park. Attractive, sustainable woodlands are key to the overall character of the development, so the retention of mature trees and their setting is essential.”

The developer refutes suggestions that the development would have an adverse impact on populations of red squirrels, pine martens and badgers, stating that there is no evidence of their activity within the application boundary.

The National Park authority is still deliberating on the proposals, which could complete in 2024 if approved.

5 Comments

#1 Posted by Graeme McCormick on 28 May 2019 at 23:10 PM

I’m told that the vast bulk of the objectors are Green Party members throughout Scotland who automatically gave their consent to Ross Greer using their names. Not very transparent! The area really needs such an investment provided it has architectural quality and includes s hospitality academy to improve career opportunities

#2 Posted by Neil C on 29 May 2019 at 10:10 AM

The Vale of Leven needs investment and jobs, while LLS needs to expand to remain a major tourist draw. I doubt the non-existent pine martens have much of an opinion on the matter either way.

If the rest of Loch Lomond was urbanised, I'd understand complaints about a loss of open space, but this comes across as Mr Greer trying to boost his public profile once again more than anything else. It screams of virtue signalling, rather than a genuine concern for the erosion of natural habitats (which will happen to some degree, but not enough to make this proposal invalid or unwelcome).

#3 Posted by Mala Leche on 30 May 2019 at 15:06 PM

#1 - Objectors '55,000 (and counting).' Membership of Scottish Green Party - c. 7,000 (and fluctuating). Can you expand on the methodology behind the 'vast bulk' calculation? Thanks.

#4 Posted by boaby wan on 31 May 2019 at 09:42 AM

The whole number of objections thing seems a bit strange, Ross Greer seems to have redefined how objections are submitted, counted and attributed - on the planning file there are 1228 comments and 1165 objections - some way off the reported faux outrage at this proposal.
The biggest elephant in the room is that the area is defined in the local plan as strategic tourism, which it looks like this proposals meets. Maybe the politicians involved in the objections had tried to stop development at the early stage of the local plan it might be more appropriate - on the face of the objections that I've seen it seems that they don't want someone from yorkshire to own a bit of scotland. There is very little in the way of substantial planning related objections - stopping a tourism related development on an area defined for tourism in a local development plan seems counter intuitive for a politician in an area that badly needs investment and jobs.

#5 Posted by Bob the builder on 4 Jun 2019 at 11:25 AM

#4 where there are bulk objections in the form of a standard letter I believe some planning authorities opt not to post these all on their portals, so the 55k report may indeed be fact. Personally I do not see anything wrong with these standard letters as a lot of laymen members of the public wish to object but do not have the knowledge or words to express their objections.

Post your comments