Planning permission refused for Flamingo Land resort at Loch Lomond

The Scottish Government has refused to grant planning permission for a controversial development on the banks of Loch Lomond.

Ministers cited concerns about the flooding risk and woodland loss when they announced what they said was a “finely balanced decision”.

Lomond Banks – which is owned by the theme park operator Flamingo Land – had hoped to construct a major leisure development at Balloch, West Dunbartonshire.

Its plans included building more than 100 holiday lodges, two hotels, a water park, a monorail and parking spaces for more than 300 cars at the site.

After a major campaign against the development, which was led by Scottish Green co-leader Ross Greer, ministers “called in” the plans in June 2025 – a month after the Government’s reporter had approved planning permission in principle for the development.

After the Scottish Government confirmed on Tuesday that planning permission in principle had been refused, Mr Greer said: “I’m absolutely delighted that we have saved Loch Lomond and defeated Flamingo Land’s destructive plans.

“This is a huge victory for the local community and for the historic campaign we built over the last decade.”

Adding that 155,000 people had joined him in “objecting to these daft plans”, Mr Greer said the decision shows “people power has protected Scotland’s most iconic landscape from this greedy corporation”.

He continued: “It’s not hard to understand why this became one of the biggest environmental campaigns in Scottish history.

“This mega resort would have had a devastating impact on the iconic local environment, the community and the local economy.

“Flamingo Land’s own documents projected more than 250 extra cars per hour on local roads at peak times. Anyone who has ever been on the A82 knows that it couldn’t possibly cope with that and would only have led to misery for residents and visitors alike.”

While the decision of Scottish ministers is “final”, it could still be appealed to the Court of Session.

But Mr Greer said: “My message to Flamingo Land today is simple – walk away.

“This community and the people of Scotland have told you time and again that your destructive plans are not welcome. It’s time to accept that verdict and end this saga. We have saved Loch Lomond.”

A Scottish Government spokesperson said: “Ministers have dismissed the appeal and refused planning permission in principle for the Lomond Banks development due to flood risk, woodland loss and wider policy conflicts.”

In a letter setting out reasons for the decision, the Government accepted there were “significant socio-economic benefits associated with the proposed development”.

But it said there were also “substantial concerns relating to flood risk” as well as the “extent and location of woodland loss and gain”.

The Government also cited the “unique nature of the site, including its sensitive and prominent location” within the Loch Lomond and the Trossachs National Park.

It concluded: “Scottish ministers consider that the material considerations do not outweigh the identified policy conflicts with the development plan in this instance.”

The decision was also welcomed by local Labour MSP and Scottish Labour deputy leader Dame Jackie Baillie, who said: “It has long been clear that the proposal was flawed and it was rejected by the overwhelming majority of my local community.

“The Scottish Government has finally taken the right decision, which goes to show that there is nothing like an election to concentrate minds.

“I am absolutely delighted at this outcome. Loch Lomond is a very special place and, with Balloch as its gateway, we need to be careful to have the right development for the area.”

However Jim Paterson, the development director for Lomond Banks, said it was “extremely disappointed” by the decision, adding the plans “represented a transformational investment in Balloch and the wider area, delivering significant employment, regeneration and long-term economic benefits to one of Scotland’s most disadvantaged communities”.

Mr Paterson said: “The independent reporter appointed by the Scottish Government carefully assessed the application and was still minded to recommend approval, recognising the substantial socio-economic, tourism and heritage benefits the project would bring.

“Today’s outcome is dismissive of the reporter’s recommendation and flies in the face of what this area was ear-marked to accomplish, which is bad news for Scottish business and tourism as a whole, not to mention the local people who will now miss out on jobs, local supply chain opportunities and wider investment as a result.”

He continued: “We note that the ministers’ reasons for refusal relate primarily to flood risk modelling and ancient woodland impacts.

“We remain confident that these matters can be fully addressed through detailed design, further technical assessment and appropriate mitigation, as is standard practice at the planning permission in principle stage.

“We will now carefully review the decision in full and consider our options.”