After the Loch Lomond and Trossachs National Park Authority (LLTNPA) had effectively excluded the local community from the planning process which led to Flamingo Land (see here and here), a Community Development Trust (CDT) provided an alternative means for people in Balloch to have a say over the future of the land in the village. By setting up a CDT to represent them, the local community could, in theory, use the Community Empowerment Act (Scotland) 2015 to ask Scottish Enterprise to transfer the land to them. That Act also gave other local representative organisations, including the Balloch and Haldane Council (BHCC), the right to lodge a ‘participation request’, for example by asking Scottish Enterprise to be involved in future decisions about the land they owned in the village.
The Loch Lomond South Community Development Trust
A public meeting called by the BHCC in 2024 gave the go ahead to the creation of a local community development trust for Balloch and Haldane, although the name subsequently chosen suggested it represented a wider area.
A first company, the Loch Lomond South Community Development Trust, was incorporated on 27th August 2024. It was dissolved on 5th August 2025 after an application in May 2025 by two of the Directors for voluntary strike-off (see here). The explanation for this appears to be that the memorandum and articles of association for the company did not meet the requirements of CDTs as set out in Scottish legislation.
A second company, the Loch Lomond South CDT Ltd was incorporated on 8th October 2024 (see here) with the same three Directors, Lynne Somerville, Andrea Middleton and Pamela Scott Gibson. A further 4 Directors, Jim Bollan (co-opted), Adrienne McAulay, David Ross and Murdo MacSween were appointed on 20th September 2025 and it is that ‘team’, with the exception of Murdo MacSween – who is missing – which is still featured on the Loch Lomond South CDT website (see here):
Companies House shows that Jim Bollan, Andrea Middleton and Adrienne McAuley have all now resigned as Directors of the CDT and a new Director, George Taylor, was appointed in January 2026. There is no other information on Companies House (accounts are due by the 8th July) and very little information on the CDT website: there are no minutes of meetings, the most recent published blog is a newsletter for November 2024 and you would not know the Trust had held their first AGM on 27th February 2026 nor what was discussed and agreed at that meeting.
The Trust has, however, continued to send out some information to those that subscribe to their newsletters who appear to include both members – i.e local residents with a right to vote – and supporters who reside elsewhere..
The Loch Lomond South CDT and Scottish Enterprise
After Scottish Enterprise transferred the land they owned at the Pierhead to the LLTNPA in May 2025 (see here), I asked Lynne Somerville, Chair of the CDT, whether they had registered an interest in acquiring this parcel of land, which in my view was crucial to the proposed Flamingo Land development. Her reply on 17th June 2025 stated that the CDT Directors had decided not to do because ‘it would not only stretch our already limited resources, but could also risk the Trust being perceived as obstructive without a clear and viable alternative in place’.
A newsletter from the CDT in July 2025 (see here) then informed subscribers that the Directors had lodged a asset transfer request to takeover the former Tourist Information Centre near the railway station in Balloch (photo above). It also stated there had been complications because the building had been promised to Flamingo Land by Scottish Enterprise as part of their Exclusivity (see here)
A further newsletter in October 2025 then asked subscribers to write to Scottish Enterprise in support of the CDT’s registration of interest. This was followed by an email on 4th January 2026 asking for feedback on whether the Directors should proceed because of the terms offered by Scottish Enterprise:
The winter newsletter sent to subscribers on 29th January contained no indication of what feedback had been received but did provide further information on the terms offered by Scottish Enterprise:
A three year licence was a lousy offer. It would allow Flamingo Land to take over the building should they successfully contest Scottish Ministers decision to refuse their application (see here), with the local community having to take on all responsibility for repairs and maintenance meantime.
Since January there has been one further email from the LLSCDT on 28th March, seeking a new chair, but no further updates on the Tourism Information Centre or what else the Directors have been doing. Given the CDT was set up to challenge how Scottish Enterprise was managing its assets in Balloch, it is somewhere ironic that they have published more information about what is going on than the CDT has on its own website, as I found out when I lodged an information request at the end of April.
The LLSCDT’s three requests to Scottish Enterprise under the Community Empowerment Act
On 29th May Scottish Enterprise responded to my information request (see here). This had asked what interests had been registered by the CDT in the land at Balloch and for section of SE’s conditional missives which showed their Exclusivity Agreement with Flamingo Land was still in force. SE declined to provide any evidence to show their agreement with Flamingo Land was still in force, probably because they knew that any appeal to the Information Commissioner would take even longer than the courts to reach a decision, but the rest of their response was far more helpful.
The most striking information they provided was that:
‘Earlier this week, Loch Lomond South CDT formally submitted a further Asset Transfer Request Form in respect of additional Scottish Enterprise-owned assets in Balloch, namely West Riverside, Drumkinnon Wood and the Gateway Centre. This new submission will now also be considered’.
It seems quite a coincidence that the CDT registered an interest in the remainder of SE’s land at Balloch the same week SE responded to my request but perhaps their February AGM had mandated the Directors to do this? Whatever the explanation – one would have thought this news would be all over their website – this about turn by the directors of the CDT is very welcome.
SE also helpfully pointed out that they proactively publish Asset Transfer Requests and their decisions about these on the Policies and Information section of their website (see here) under the obscure heading ‘Owned Investment Property Assets’. Unfortunately, a month later the CDT’s recent request has still not been published so it is not possible to understand the rationale behind it. However, the CDT’s full application for the former Tourism Information building is available (see here), along with Scottish Enterprise’s decision. . These show the registration of interest was submitted on 24th December 2024, that Scottish Enterprise took 11 months before responding in November 2025 and much interesting information about the application and SE’s proposed license
The Owned Investment Property Assets section of SE’s website also reveals that the LLSCDT, along with the BHCC, lodged a Participation Request on 18th September 2025, asking to be involved in future decisions about land at Balloch. SE responded on 12th December stating that:
‘Flamingo Land Ltd.has given a contractual obligation to SE to comply with the provisions of the “Lomond Promise”’
and,
‘Scottish Enterprise requires full unfettered discretion regarding monitoring of this obligation’
so,
‘If the planning application is approved, then under this option Scottish Enterprise would propose that it will continue to engage regularly with BHCC & LLSCAT as the project progresses to satisfy the conditions of contract’.
This ‘commitment’ from Scottish Enterprise is completely meaningless and, together with its derisory offer of a temporary license to occupy the former information building, perhaps explains why the CDT Directors have now decided to register an interest in ALL the land SE owns at Balloch, including the existing development at Loch Lomond Shores and Drumkinnon Woods which Flamingo Land has used to ‘offset’ some of the adverse impacts of its proposed development.(see here).
In my view that is what the CDT should have done from the start to put pressure on Scottish Enterprise and the Scottish Government. While the recent attempt to register an interest is welcome – SE could still refuse it even if the Courts uphold the Scottish Government’s decision to refuse the Flamingo Land planning application – it will have no chance of success unless the public know about it and are involved in developing an alternative to Flamingo Land at Balloch. That means the LLSCDT being far more open, outward focused and accountable than it has been to date.
Well, why are we even talking about this in a national park in the first place?——well because it isn’t a real national park in the first place.
Or the Development Trust could use the powers contained within part 5 of the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2016 to acquire the land through compulsory purchase. This does not require any registering of the land as under asset transfer legislation or pre registering before sale as in the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003. The Trust simply needs to demonstrate that the land is required for “sustainable development” purposes. Go for it!
Nick,
Thank you for highlighting the Trust’s recent Asset Transfer Request and the wider issue of community ownership at Balloch. It is an important subject, and I recognise the effort you have put into researching the background and obtaining information.
However, as Founder/Chair of the Loch Lomond South Community Development Trust, I feel I need to respond to a number of assumptions made in your article.
While you have pieced together a detailed chronology from publicly available documents, Companies House records and information requests, the article frequently moves beyond the available evidence to draw conclusions about the Trust’s motivations, strategy and decision-making without seeking our perspective.
For example, you describe our recent Asset Transfer Request as an “about turn” and suggest the Trust should have pursued a different course from the outset, including seeking an asset transfer of the Pier Head. We always had the other assets in mind and the decision ref Pierhead was considered carefully by the Board and voted against for very good reasons. As a newly established, volunteer-led organisation, there was no realistic prospect of acquiring a single parcel of land that we would have been unable to develop, manage, or use for the benefit of the community.
Im sure i don’t need to tell you, Community Asset Transfer is not about acquiring assets for the sake of it or simply to frustrate another proposal. It is about securing assets where there is a sustainable community benefit, a viable business case and the capacity to deliver. At that stage, those conditions did not exist, and it would have been irresponsible to suggest otherwise.
Our decisions have always been made following careful consideration of our legal responsibilities, governance, available resources, professional advice and the changing circumstances surrounding the Balloch site. Those are not matters that can be inferred from public records alone.
What I found particularly disappointing was the implication that the Trust will somehow fail to involve the people of Balloch and Haldane in shaping the future of these assets. There is no evidence to support that conclusion. In fact, our actions demonstrate the opposite.
The formal consultation on the Local Place Plan has taken place over the last year, which you can view here: https://www.planballochhaldane.net/, but it has been informed by almost two years of detailed engagement undertaken by the Trust with local residents, community organisations, businesses and other stakeholders. That work has involved listening to people’s views, identifying local priorities and ensuring that the Place Plan reflects the aspirations of the community. Community participation has not been an afterthought; it has been the foundation of the Trust’s work from the beginning.
For that reason, it is disappointing that such a significant body of engagement is largely overlooked, while assumptions are made about how the Trust may behave in the future. Any proposals for the future of Balloch will continue to be shaped by the views already gathered and through ongoing engagement with the community we exist to serve.
Constructive scrutiny of the Trust is entirely appropriate, and we welcome it. However, scrutiny should be based on evidence rather than assumptions about the intentions or motivations of unpaid volunteers who have committed a significant amount of their time to securing the best possible future for Balloch and Haldane.
Lynne
Out of interest Lynne, how many local residents are registered members of LLSCT?
Hi Douglas, We have more than 1,000 members, including 647 from the Balloch and Haldane area. Most of our remaining members live across the wider G83 and West Dunbartonshire postcode area, with others based in Edinburgh, Highlands and Islands +. We also have 21 locally based businesses as business members, reflecting strong support from the immediate community.
A very steep learning curve for the CDT so I say well done and keep going. It might be worthwhile for the CDT to get in touch with Community Enterprise and through their free Accelerate Program get the community engagement survey and publicity underway professionally ??
Hi Robert,
Thank you for your kind words and suggestion. We have been working closely with DTAS/COSS for the past three years and have already received support from Community Enterprise, who helped refine the business plan I drafted.
Over the past two years, we have applied to a number of funding programmes to deliver a range of community interventions, including training for local people and businesses in disciplines such as AI and digital skills, writing and self-publishing, entrepreneurship, and business growth and support services. We have also secured pledges of support and partnerships with organisations including, but not limited to, the University of the West of Scotland, Women’s Enterprise Scotland, and CodeBase Techscaler.
Unfortunately, due to the ongoing appeal process, and us not having an actual base to work from none have been successful. For example we have had to forfeit both capital and operational funding opportunities that we were shortlisted for from the Sir Tom Hunter Foundation, Scottish EDGE, and CLLD funding. The continuing Lomond Banks/Flamingo Land situation has left us in a period of limbo. While our partners remain supportive and opportunities are ready to progress, we are unable to move forward until the appeal process is concluded. This is frustrating, the conditional missive/exclusivity agreement between SE and the developer prevent us from progressing either the asset transfer or any of the initiatives we have worked so hard to develop.
The Board and volunteers bring a wealth of executive-level experience across a wide range of disciplines but we still need others to join us to help. The challenge has never been a lack of expertise, ambition or vision, it is one of capacity, other key volunteers and I all work full-time (some two other jobs) and have family commitments, and, most significantly, the fact that our hands remain tied until the planning and appeal process has run its course. We are, however, ready to move forward as soon as that happens. If you want to get involved please email info@lochlomondscdt.co.uk