REVISED plans for a £40 million tourism development at the south end of Loch Lomond include a number of "significant amendments", the developer says.

The controversial Lomond Banks proposals, in Balloch, have been amended by the developers "following feedback from a wide range of sources" - including the Loch Lomond and the Trossachs National Park Authority and the local community.

The company is seeking planning permission for an 'apart-hotel' with up to 60 bedrooms, a 'budget hotel' with up to 32 bed spaces, a leisure centre/pool/water park/spa, restaurants, a cafe, retail areas, a craft brewery and pub, a visitor reception area, external activity spaces - and a monorail running through the site.

Previously, we told how the site faced strong opposition, drawing criticism from elected officials, including MSPs Jackie Baillie and Ross Greer, as well as from the public. Earlier this year, we reported how a petition gathered more than 10,000 objections within 24 hours.

What's changed?

Among the revisions are plans to retain existing woodland at the proposed ‘area 10’ - next to Ben Lomond Way, the main vehicle access to the development and also the main vehicle access to the existing Loch Lomond Shores shopping complex.

The previously proposed staff accommodation and facilities in 'area 10' would be absorbed into other areas of the development including Station Square, Woodbank House and the visitor hub.

Dumbarton and Vale of Leven Reporter:

The density of holiday accommodation at Woodbank House has also been significantly reduced, by removing all 17 woodland bothies alongside five woodland lodges from the development area. 

Lomond Banks says existing non-native and invasive species would also be removed and replaced with native trees and planting instead.

Also among the changes unveiled are plans to plant more trees, with the developers claiming they are “enhancing the woodland setting for many of the self-catering lodges”.

It has also allowed the retention of all trees in area 10 (the former area set aside for staff facilities) and increased native tree planting at Woodbank, resulting in higher net biodiversity gain compared to the original proposals submitted.

Meanwhile, Lomond Banks has also committed to retaining the amount of previously proposed compensatory planting, “ensuring there is no reduction in terms of their input to biodiversity value”.

Dumbarton and Vale of Leven Reporter:

Jim Paterson, development director for Lomond Banks, said: “We have been committed to listening to the National Park, the local community, local businesses and all other key stakeholders, and their feedback to date has really helped to shape our plans into something that fits the vision for a tourism business of the future, which Balloch and the wider Loch Lomond area could truly benefit from.

“We welcomed this latest feedback from the Park Authority and much of it aligned with what we were hearing from the community. We got to work to modify the proposals accordingly with our partners by removing Area 10, retaining more trees, bringing down lodge and bothy numbers and ensuring an overall higher net biodiversity gain.”  

Lomond Banks has provided further information on its parking strategy in a bid to reassure the National Park on the provision it has put in place.

It has also provided further traffic statistics for different times of the year to indicate the uptake on traffic numbers, with Mr Paterson hitting out at opponents for “scaremongering” over the issue.

He added: “I must be very clear that the opposition is using traffic and parking as a scaremongering tool and their statistics and conclusions are simply not accurate.

Dumbarton and Vale of Leven Reporter:

"Whilst we do appreciate the road network is an ongoing concern for those living around the A82, our surveys have indicated that the development simply will not bring the concentrated numbers at peak times that it is being accused of and we have mitigated this further by introducing measures such as staggered check-in and check-out times to ensure this is not the case.

“All traffic surveys submitted to our statutory consultees West Dunbartonshire Council Roads Department have, to date, been satisfactory. We have also submitted a comprehensive parking strategy to the National Park and conducted further surveys through peak seasons to submit to the Parks Authority.

"Alongside this, we have made a number of commitments to join working groups to look at sustainable travel planning and eco-travel at the venue, to help ease congestion for the longer term.”

In addition to traffic and transport the National Park asked Lomond Banks to provide assurances around the location and position of the John Muir Way, as a walkway of national importance. The developer says it "has clarified this and assured once again its position on providing permanent access to all".

Mr Paterson concluded: “Our commitment to Balloch shines through with this amended submission. We have been steadfast in our dedication to making this submission about the community and it has been very much shaped by their voice and opinion. The plans blend the natural beauty and ecology of the area with the local business opportunities alongside the rejuvenation of Woodbank House – bringing back to life a forgotten treasure.

Dumbarton and Vale of Leven Reporter:

“We believe, our proposals continue to fulfil the objectives set out in the Local Development Plan and in the Balloch Charrette and that these revisions address the matters raised by interested parties, benefitting the area, in a manner that both the local and wider community can be truly proud of for generations to come.”

The resubmission triggers a 30-day consultation period with all statutory consultees before the application can be progressed and determined by Loch Lomond and the Trossachs National Park Authority.

Flamingo Land submitted revised plans to the park authority in May of last year - having withdrawn an original set of proposals in 2019 after they attracted furious opposition and more than 50,000 formal objections.

The national park's officials also recommended that planning permission for the original development should be refused.

According to the National Park’s website, 356 coments – 322 of them objections – have been submitted in response to the plans lodged last year.

More than 41,000 people have also signed a petition set up by the Scottish Green Party protesting against the 2022 proposals.

More information on the plans is at