An MSP has written to the First Minister to end the development agreement between Flamingo Land operators and a government agency if plans are rejected next month.
Ross Greer, MSP for West Scotland, has called for an end to Flamingo Land's 'exclusive agreement' with Scottish Enterprise, who own the public land on the banks of Loch Lomond, if the proposals for a 'Lomond Banks' development is refused on September 16.
In a letter to First Minister, John Swinney, Mr Greer has asked the Scottish Government to instruct its business agency.
The Yorkshire-based theme park operator was originally granted the agreement, now a 'conditional missive' in 2016 and had it renewed in 2020.
Mr Greer says this agreement means that only Flamingo Land can buy the land and prevents the community and other interested parties from bringing forward less destructive alternative proposals.
Flamingo Land’s proposal has received over 145,000 objections via a campaign portal set up by the Scottish Greens, making it by far the most unpopular planning application in history.
Organisations that have objected include the National Trust for Scotland, Woodland Trust and Ramblers Scotland and Balloch and Haldane Community Council. The Scottish Environment Protection Agency has also issued a conditional objection based on flood risk.
Mr Greer said: “For far too long residents in Balloch have lived with the constant threat of Flamingo Land hanging over their community. For a decade this saga has angered, frustrated and exhausted local people.
“A key reason for it going on this long is the ridiculous exclusive agreement that Flamingo Land has, which has given them a grip on the area and prevented the community from bringing forward their own proposals.
“We cannot allow a theme park operator to hold one of Scotland’s most iconic sites to ransom in the way they have.
“The agreement should never have been renewed after their first application failed, not after Balloch residents and people across Scotland had made clear the strength of opposition to these destructive plans.
“It would be inappropriate for the First Minister to comment on a specific application, even one as damaging as Flamingo Land. But his government can instruct Scottish Enterprise not to renew this agreement in the event that their current application is rejected on 16th September.
“If this bid is rejected, then it must be the end of the road for Flamingo Land. They can’t keep coming back and inflicting more misery on residents who have made it perfectly clear that they are not welcome.
"The exclusive agreement must be brought to an end and local people must be freed from the anxiety and uncertainty that has been caused.”
Jim Paterson, Development Director for Lomond Banks, said: “Our exclusivity agreement with Scottish Enterprise follows on from a stringent, public tender process where our proposals for West Riverside were deemed to be the most feasible to bring to fruition and closely met the objectives and ambitions for the area in the Local Development Plan.
“Through real, positive dialogue with local residents, businesses, and stakeholders, we've shaped our plans to meet the area's needs and aspirations for job creation, economic growth, and inward investment, whilst being sympathetic to the area’s natural beauty.
“We fully expect that our agreement will continue as per the conditions set out in the contract. Our commitment to Balloch and West Riverside is unwavering, and we believe our proposed development is sustainable, environmentally sound, commercially viable and will be a catalyst for investment, generating opportunities for both the local community and Scottish tourism for years to come.”
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 and robust marketing process.
“The planning proposal is now going through the regulatory process, which has included extensive public consultation, and it would not be appropriate for us to comment further on the outcome of that process while it is ongoing.”
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here