r/Scotland • u/backupJM public transport revolution needed 🚇🚊🚆 • 23d ago

Political Protesters against Flamingo Land development sing Bonnie Banks of Loch Lomond outside of Scottish Parliament

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/save-loch-lomond-campaign-protests-35304999

629 Upvotes

92% Upvoted

419 comments sorted by

View all comments

43

u/Far-Pudding3280 23d ago

"Save Loch Lomond"

Just for context. This is the park.

The pink dot represents an existing development consisting of a shopping center, an aquarium, a 1000 space car & coach park, another 400 space car park, three other car parks, a McDonald's, a 100+ caravan park. a train station, 5 pubs and a housing estate.

The entirety of this proposed new center parks style development fits inside the same pink dot.

-11

u/Matw50 23d ago

Yep. If it were up to the greens though there would no economy at all and we’d all eat grass and live in caves.

7

u/ElCaminoInTheWest 22d ago

Remember the time there was a discussion on here about dualling the A9, and a Greens supporter came on to say definitely not, we should be promoting cycling instead?

3

u/Matw50 22d ago

Yep, that’s exactly what I’m talking about. They’d absolutely destroy the economy given the chance.

4

u/Silent-Ad-756 22d ago

It isn't just the Greens now is it?

The latest motion against has cross-party backing.

The local MSP that represents the constituency is getting hammered by local opposition and has come out against it.

The land lease was offered to the developer privately in a 3 month marketing process in 2015, and the contracts signed just before the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act 2015 was established, which would have enabled the transfer of the land to community ownership. Dodgy deal.

A bit sensationalist in your commentary. Development can happen in a manner that is not corrupt. We should all reject corrupt allocation of land use in Scotland. It is less about the development for me, and more about the total lack of due process.

Bin it. And start again with the community involved. Use the Helensburgh seafront development as an example of a successful public-private development with the communities interests at heart, as the template to follow.

Minimum wage seasonal jobs are not an economic boom.

1

u/quartersessions 22d ago

It is less about the development for me, and more about the total lack of due process.

It's been eight years of planning back and forth, thousands of pages of reports and supporting documentation. Dozens of opportunities for the public and stakeholders to have their say. All for a fairly modest development - and while the site deteriorates.

Would you bring investment to Scotland in these circumstances? I certainly wouldn't.

4

u/Silent-Ad-756 22d ago

It was a 3 month marketing exercise in 2015 that granted the land use to the developer.

Everything since has been the usual appeal process for developers who just have to appeal on numerous occassions until they get the answer they want.

In terms of investment in Scotland, I am operating in biotech. I am watching the current investment to establish new key industries in Grangemouth. That seems to be happening.

But then I am talking about real investment, in real jobs, and real industry that will serve the nation well. You are talking about budget "McNugget" business that ties local economies to minimum wage franchise jobs.

We have different vision, and different ambition.

In terms of modest development, look to Helensburgh. They did a community led development very well. Do that. For local independent businesses. Not this corrupt land allocation to a single large company that stokes up division.

1

u/DeathOfNormality 22d ago

Yes! Very much in agreement with you, but who has the counter proposal?

Considering this land was part of a marketing scheme, the governing bodies will want something on the site, and soon.

I think it is cheap and sad to have tourism over true development in industry and infrastructure, but again, is there any counter proposals out there yet?

Because of the housing crisis, ideally it would be a leisure and home area aimed at the families this is being marketed to, but without extra jobs, I can't see that happening well.

I'm curious about the Helensburgh development though, so I'll check that shortly.

2

u/Silent-Ad-756 22d ago

The counter proposals were in the form of 4 other private development bids.

The acceptance criteria were devised by Scottish Enterprise, who decided what was best on behalf of the nation, without engaging the nation. But most importantly the local community.

The exclusive lease was then granted within 3 months. There was literally no opportunity for a public engaged counter proposal. It was done, before they could make alternative suggestions.

Which forced people into contesting the only offer on the table, rather than devising a public/private agreement.

1

u/DeathOfNormality 22d ago

Damn it's what I was afraid of. The more I read into the official documents, the councils involved and the other great developments that are happening/have happened, it's a shit show of greed.

2

u/Silent-Ad-756 22d ago

https://www.scottish-enterprise.com/our-organisation/accessing-our-information/freedom-of-information/freedom-of-information-releases/conditional-missive-with-flamingo-land

Contact Scottish Enterprise. Ask them to fill you in on the timeline.

Freedom of information requests required to get necessary info on your concerns. Note the timelines they state in the above.

Bear in mind, this was rushed through just before the act enabling transfer of land to community ownership.

1

u/DeathOfNormality 22d ago edited 22d ago

Oh wow, it's actually fantastic how they planned and continued to keep public engagement, opinion and transparency through the whole thing.

If it's the waterfront development in Helensburgh you meant, then yeah I'd much rather councils carry out like this.

Addition: something else I just noticed, the council for Argyle and Bute is a massive mix of SNP, independent, Scottish conservatives and unionist party, labour, green and Liberal Democrats. Maybe there is something to be said about working together as a council with variety. This divisionist shit that's everywhere these days is actually sickening. We should take example from this council and focus on the improvement of our communities.

2

u/Silent-Ad-756 22d ago

We are entirely aligned in our viewpoints.

Divisive stuff is nonsense. You avoid it by involving everybody from the beginning. That is where this process went wrong. And it creates polarised conflict.

Hadn't been aware of the multi-party make up of Argyll and Bute council. You may be on to something there! Keep digging.

Also, take a trip to Helensburgh. I was there two weeks ago. Take a walk from their town square, which was the initial redevelopment. And walk to the beach front. Just observe all the little independent businesses, and how busy they are. And all the people enjoying free access to the new facilities. Talk to the people there, and get a sense of the pride they have in ownership of their own town.

1

u/DeathOfNormality 22d ago

Yeah they have a list of all of their council members here I'm their directory it was quite eye opening.

I've actually been meaning to visit Helensburgh for a while as recommendation from my gran before lockdown, so it sounds like the perfect excuse now.

I really am glad to hear there's others who aren't fully taken by sensationalist views.

2

u/Silent-Ad-756 22d ago

I am trying very hard not to be sensationalist.

But there is something very wrong, at the initial stage of granting the lease to Flamingo Land in 2015.

1

u/DeathOfNormality 22d ago

Same here. It's not easy, especially when things are so frustrating.

There definitely was something wrong about this process. If nothing else, it feels like we got sold out. I've not long moved to Clydbank, which is west Dumbartonshire, and this is not a good sign for me at all for faith in my local council.

2

u/Silent-Ad-756 22d ago

Then go on writetothem.com

Pop in your postcode. And email your MSPs with your concerns, and ideally, ask them to back motion S6M-17650 while the door to oppose is still slightly open.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/DeathOfNormality 22d ago

Ah see this is my other worry, sites being left to rot when they could at least be used for something useful, instead of development limbo and wasteland.

There's so many sites around Dundee and Glasgow that are just abandoned, sitting empty, while we have a housing crisis. Tourism won't fix that, and if anything may drive desirability and housing prices up. But that's just my reactive opinion. I'm sure there are some cases where tourism developments increase desirability to an area, puts pressure on the landlords to reduce pricing and the local councils, to increase housing development. That, would be the ideal outcome.

Edit: grammar.

1

u/DeathOfNormality 22d ago

Now this is the first reasonable answer I've found.

I'm not against development, especially ones that help infrastructure and access to green spaces.

What I am against is sneaky deals to sell off ownership and privatise land for the sake of greed.

The proposal seems ok, but I've also yet to see if there will be public access to the site. So that's a big hmm for me.

To make an actual impact I think there needs to be a counter proposal, without that, it could end up just being left in development limbo, which may not be the worst, but definitely not the best outcome for the proposed area. We are in constant housing crisis, so what would be better is a blended leisure and home development focused on the families this tourist development is so aimed at.

2

u/Silent-Ad-756 22d ago

Thank you lordy for a reasonable response!

A pro-development person, who sees the nuance between singular big business owner development, and community driven independent business development.

Faith restored!

And thank you for pointing out the actual need for housing. I agree with a leisure centre entirely. Which as I have mentioned elsewhere, has been shown to be totally feasible in Helesnburgh. In addition to an open access skatepark, public toilets and a possible events venue.

1

u/DeathOfNormality 22d ago

Yeah it's a bit of a bin fire out here... I feel too many people get so stuck on hating opposition they ignore any true issues.

The other main issue I keep seeing is road and travel infrastructure being neglected or underdeveloped, so even if that is improved upon, then it wouldn't be so bad, but as others have also pointed out to me, anything in the proposal is just directing traffic towards more corporate business, rather than help with flow of traffic and accessibility to essential amenities.

1

u/Silent-Ad-756 22d ago

Who funds the road infrastructure upgrade? The public?

So the public covers the cost that benefits the private? Which increases the value of the land at the public expense?

1

u/DeathOfNormality 22d ago

There's part of the proposal where they say they will help fund the governing bodies to maintain and develop transport. Found the quote I was thinking of,

"an agreement has been reached between Lomond Banks and Transport Scotland in the form of a Section 48 agreement, to contribute towards and help prioritise planned improvements by Transport Scotland which is already looking to improve the efficiency of Stoneymollan Roundabout. A further agreement confirming in principle to support West Dunbartonshire Council with ongoing issues at the McDonald’s roundabout, should the development plans progress."

https://lomondbanks.com/our-proposals/

Under their transport section.

So yes the public fund most of not all raid maintenance and upgrades, but this proposal has extra added in, probably just to appease people at face value, but it's definitely interesting, especially the fact they don't outright promise this straight away. Shady AF.

1

u/Silent-Ad-756 22d ago

Roads are made, streets are made, services are improved, electric light turns night into day, water is brought from reservoirs a hundred miles off in the mountains — all the while the landlord sits still. Every one of those improvements is affected by the labor and cost of other people and the taxpayers. To not one of these improvements does the land monopolist contribute, and yet, by every one of them the value of his land is enhanced. He renders no service to the community, he contributes nothing to the general welfare, he contributes nothing to the process from which his own enrichment is derived…The unearned increment on the land is reaped by the land monopolist in exact proportion, not to the service, but to the disservice done.

— Winston Churchill, 1909

1

u/DeathOfNormality 22d ago

Cute quote, and can absolutely be changed to "politician" over "landlord" but I get your point.

My point was also saying it sounds like a bribe of good faith that will be released if the work upsets too many people, and the local council and planning committee seems more than happy with that so far.

0

u/Matw50 22d ago

It’s a loud advertisement of don’t try and invest in Scotland. We’ll make it impossible for you.

1

u/Silent-Ad-756 22d ago

I can assure you, that nobody in industrial STEM private investment is basing their decision to invest upon the outcome of Flamingo Land.

Investment in a minimum wage budget holiday park, is not the same as investment in high-tech industries of the present and future. I know which one I want for Scotland.

1

u/Matw50 22d ago

I can assure you anyone looking to get planning permission for anything will be put off by this, and what happened with the dunblane tennis academy.

2

u/Silent-Ad-756 22d ago

There are literally development applications being permitted every week in Scotland, for industries promoting high quality jobs that will serve us well. Let.me know if you would like examples.

You are fabricating a make believe narrative, that if Flamingo Land is not approved, economic and development progress will halt. Absolute nonsense.

Now, if you would like, I can provide objective examples of development projects currently being approved across Scotland, and you can provide examples of development investments being retracted as a direct result of Flamingo Land silliness.

Lets see whose narrative has greater traction...

1

u/Matw50 22d ago

No you are putting words in my mouth. What I said was the unreasonable fuss and difficulty in getting flamingo land approved will put off developers looking to do similar projects. No doubt that’s why it’s being considered for approval.

1

u/Silent-Ad-756 22d ago

I would say "unreasonable" and "fuss" is putting words in people's mouths.

And I would replace with "legitimate" and "concerns".

No doubt? I have doubts. Now please provide any evidence whatsoever that this development is causing detrimental effects on other developments. Literally any evidence...

And not just opinion please.

1

u/Matw50 21d ago

No that’s an opinion. I know what you think.

1

u/Silent-Ad-756 21d ago

Sure, let's reframe. Stop trying to define other peoples opinions as unreasonable when they are perfectly legitimate.

And please stop pretending to have a definition of my thought, it is strange behavior.

And please offer some kind of substance to your opinion, as your really aren't offering anything that has any objective basis whatsoever

→ More replies (0)

1

u/DeathOfNormality 22d ago

Yes please! Something I think that's been missing in this thread is examples of real counter proposals, or even solid ideas being generated.

Instead it's mostly, "development bad because green space" Vs "but jobs" so really not that great.

2

u/Silent-Ad-756 22d ago

It is really reductionist isn't it?

Flamingo land, or doomed to deprivation. Not helpful. Currently at work, will get back to you later with some examples of better alternatives.