A park that aims to provide active health and mental wellbeing facilities has attracted 50 objections.
The developers of a ‘Wellness Park’ outside Auchinleck, East Ayrshire, have been criticised for missing out key information in their planning application.
The Barony Eco-Therapy Wellness Centre aims to provide active health and mental wellbeing facilities alongside accommodation such as lodges and geodesic domes.
Read more: Glasgow lecturer's mercy mission to Poland to help Ukrainian refugees
Critics have blasted the developers, National Pride, for continuing to add important information after the deadline for public comments, forcing further consultation to be undertaken.
Other objectors have complained about ‘meaningless’ wording, references to wildlife habitats and landscapes that have nothing to do with the Barony site, inaccurate assessments of native animals, the loss of more trees than originally indicated and "inexperienced" developers.
Objections have been raised about the eco-therapy wellness park
However, both Ayrshire Chamber of Commerce and Auchinleck Community Council have backed the plan.
Ochiltree ecologist Michael Howes, who is also a campaigner against the Killoch incinerator project, outlined his issues with the wellness plans.
In his objection he said that the level of some wildlife has been underestimated, while others, such as lichens, have been ‘completely ignored.’
Read more: Glasgow School of Art rebuild: £62million project goes out to tender
He added: “The mammal survey inexplicably fails to record nine common mammals present. The Butterfly survey fails to record twelve of the regular species and the Moth survey falls short by over 70 species.
“The lack of depth of understanding of this site is astounding.”
He added: “To have a plan foisted on us by two insurance risk managers from London with only crowd funded resources and no practical experience of such developments but loads of glossy PR is inevitably provocative.”
Another objector, Paul Cobb, said the application should have been rejected ‘at the outset’ for being incomplete.
He continued, criticising the lack of clarity on the facilities being proposed.
He said: “Apart from the accommodation units it is still not clear exactly what they intend to build.
“There are meaningless expressions such as projective ecologies, biophilics, fish and invertebrates research, water management and education, vertical farming, and MGB, with no explanation of what these buildings are, what size they are, or what they will do.
“We can’t tell from all this confusion what it is they really want.
“The application documents mislead by including things that are not even part of the application, but giving the impression they are.
“The application documents further mislead by including illustrations of habitats, landscapes, and farming that have no connection whatsoever with the Barony, and would not even be possible on the “soil” of a coal bing.
“The Arboricultural Assessment shows the true scale of tree removal to be much greater than the applicant led us to believe, a level which is unacceptable in this day and age.”
The lack of information also prompted objections from statutory consultees, including the Coal Authority, SEPA and even the council’s own Environmental Health department, which said it had failed to get vital information, even after requesting it a second time.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel