How a theme park became the most unpopular project in Scottish history

Yahoo

6 days ago

From the station at Balloch where the train from Glasgow terminates, it's a short stroll through delightful woodland to the famous 'bonnie banks' of Loch Lomond, Scotland. Yet during the walk, Lynne Somerville becomes more and more agitated.
'This,' she points out as a family walks past with a toddler in a pushchair, 'is where the monorail would run.'
'Here,' she says as two dog walkers amble by, 'are the trees that would be cut down to make room for the lodges.'
Where the woods end abruptly, a beach overlooks one of Scotland's finest and most recognisable panoramas: the vast expanse of the loch, stretching northwards to the towering peak of Ben Lomond. Fringed with hills as far as the eye can see, the water is dotted with kayakers, paddle-boarders, yachts berthed at a distant marina and cruise boats carrying tourists.
'And this,' Somerville explains, 'is where they want to build the hotel and water park.
'This place, this view... It's a national treasure. What they're planning here is just an act of vandalism.'
Her anger is directed at a divisive proposal by theme park operator Flamingo Land to build a holiday resort on the southern shores of Loch Lomond.
Known as Lomond Banks, the project has been described as 'the most unpopular planning application in Scottish history', after a petition against it gathered more than 155,000 signatures.
While it is only the latest attempt by business to capitalise on Loch Lomond's enduring appeal – the area has drawn mass tourism for more than 200 years – it is certainly the most controversial.
Planning permission was denied last year after the Loch Lomond and the Trossachs National Park authority ruled the resort was incompatible with environmental and conservation policies.
But last month, a planning official appointed by the Scottish Government overruled that decision and granted the resort provisional approval.
Objectors – including Somerville, who lives nearby and sits on the local community council – are outraged, and are stepping up their campaign to block the development through political pressure and even the threat of legal action.
Inevitably, though, Lomond Banks also has supporters – who believe the £40 million project will deliver a much-needed boost to tourism, create jobs and attract investment.
With a final decision expected later this year, both sides have shared with The Telegraph their strong views on the subject – sparking a debate not only about Loch Lomond but also about the role of national parks and, more broadly, about how to manage development in Britain's scenic areas in a way that balances the often-competing aims of conservation and economic growth, the needs of local residents and the demands of visitors.
Billed as a 'world-class family tourism destination', Lomond Banks is being proposed by Flamingo Land, which also runs a theme park and zoo in North Yorkshire named after the brightly coloured birds that were introduced to the site when it opened in the 1950s.
After initial plans in 2018 were met with strong opposition, the company submitted new proposals in 2020 for a 'resort village' featuring a 60-room hotel, budget hostel with 32 beds and 100 self-catering holiday lodges.
The proposed resort would include a swimming pool, water park and spa, along with restaurants, a café, craft brewery and beer hall, plus picnic and barbecue areas – all connected by a monorail. It is set to be built in the village of Balloch, long regarded as the gateway to Loch Lomond.
Tourists first began flocking to the area in the 18th century, drawn by the romantic allure of Highland scenery. By the 19th and 20th centuries, it had become a popular escape for Glaswegians seeking respite from the city's industrial smog – just 25 miles away.
Fittingly, the proposed development would sit beside a striking symbol of tourism's evolution: the Maid of the Loch paddle steamer. In its 1950s heyday, the vessel carried up to 1,000 visitors at a time across the loch. Now retired and resting at the water's edge, it awaits long-promised restoration.
At present, the main draw in Balloch is the Loch Lomond Shores visitor centre, opened in 2002. It features a viewing platform, aquarium, shopping mall with cafés, outdoor clothing stores, gift shops and a small branch of Frasers – all set beside a sprawling car park.
The new resort would straddle this existing hub, with one half built in the wooded West Riverside area between the train station and the loch, and the other in the grounds of the ruined Woodbank House. The mansion would be restored to provide self-catering accommodation, surrounded by a cluster of holiday lodges.
Flamingo Land insists the resort would 'reflect its beautiful natural surroundings' and 'complement the scenic landscape'.
But the Balloch and Haldane community council argues the development would undermine the very qualities that draw visitors to the area.
Somerville explains: 'The company is trying to profit from selling Bonnie Scotland to the tourists. People have always come here for the scenery, to get away from the city and to enjoy nature and fresh air. But these plans would mean losing the essence of the place, destroying its character.
'Loch Lomond has a national identity – but that would be lost for ever, for the sake of a development that won't create value for local people and would buckle the area's infrastructure.'
The community council has warned the resort would make life a 'living hell' for locals, citing a dramatic rise in traffic and fears it would siphon trade away from existing hotels and restaurants.
Somerville adds: 'The resort is just too big. If it went ahead, it would completely swamp the village.'
Not all residents are firmly opposed. Some, like Debbie Savage – who runs a fitness business and walks her dog, Ruby, in the woods – remain undecided.
She says: 'There's a danger the area could be ruined if the development is too commercial or done in a way that isn't sensitive. I understand the need for investment, but it has to be done in a way that is mindful of local residents.'
Some, however, are firmly in favour – including Neil Mayles, who runs a business selling boats and marine equipment. He says: 'The national park authority hasn't always been the friend of business and enterprise, so something is desperately needed in the area to bring employment and investment. The planned resort would bring nothing but benefits.'
The developers are keen to emphasise that Lomond Banks would create hundreds of local jobs during construction, followed by 200 full-time, part-time and seasonal roles once the resort opens.
In overturning the national park authority's decision to reject the plans, the Scottish Government's planning reporter also concluded that the project could deliver 'locally significant' benefits in terms of employment and economic growth.
The company argues that those opposed to the development represent only a 'vocal minority'.
Jim Paterson, the project's development director, says: 'Our vision to bring about plans that create economic growth, investment, jobs and an infrastructure that will benefit the local community and beyond, is unwavering.
'The reality is that Lomond Banks has undergone extensive scrutiny. Following an independent and detailed review, the Government's planning reporter has issued a notice of intention to recommend our proposals for approval, recognising that they align with planning policy and will deliver significant public benefits. These include the restoration of the historic Woodbank House ruin, enhancements to biodiversity, and much-needed economic regeneration.'
Paterson insists the resort would encroach on just 280 metres of Loch Lomond's 153km shoreline, and says it would be 'sympathetically designed to reflect the scale, character and natural beauty of the area'.
Even so, fallout from the reporter's provisional approval continues. The National Park authority has described the decision as 'deeply disappointing' and says it stands by its original reasons for rejecting the plan. The Scottish Government, meanwhile, has declined to comment, stating only that the decision was made on its behalf by an independent planning expert.
Opponents have been far more outspoken. The Scottish Green Party has urged the SNP Government to 'put the natural environment ahead of corporate profit' and reconsider the ruling, while the local community council remains resolute in its campaign to block Lomond Banks.
Somerville adds: 'What's happened is grossly undemocratic. What's the point of having a national park authority with planning powers if the Government simply overrules it? As far as we're concerned, the future of one of Scotland's most beautiful places is at stake. This resort mustn't be allowed to go ahead.'
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.