Clash over plans for wellness park
A park that aims to provide active health and mental wellbeing facilities has attracted 50 objections.
The developers of a ‘Wellness Park’ outside Auchinleck have been criticised for missing out key information in its planning application.
The Barony Eco-Therapy Wellness Centre aims to provide active health and mental wellbeing facilities alongside accommodation such as lodges and geodomes.
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.
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.
He said: “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.”
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.
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. But the developers hit back at what they claim to be objectors’ ‘lack of understanding’.
Irene Bisset, director and co-founder of the organisation, who is from a mining family, said she was ‘acutely’ aware of the sensitivity of the site.
She said: “These surveys, in our case undertaken by ecological specialist RPS Consulting, focus on species that are afforded legal protection or could potentially be vulnerable, rather than every organism that may occur on a site. We take the ecological interests of the site seriously and will ensure that the important features on the site relating to biodiversity are retained and are considered throughout the design and planning process.
“Ecology is key to the concept proposed for the site and we intend to foster the site’s environmental assets and manage them to the benefit of the local ecological system. To date the ecology on the site has been ignored and unmanaged.”
She argued that some objections were as a result of a misunderstanding of the planning process.
“What we are seeking to achieve here is planning permission in principle that establishes the principle of development of the overall site and this has been validated by the council,” Ms Bisset continued. “The accusation that we have not provided details on such matters as accommodation is, therefore, irrelevant.
“Should we obtain planning permission in principle from the council, we will then follow up with detailed planning applications for elements, including accommodation and a detailed landscape and ecology management plan. It is entirely normal for additional clarification to be submitted during the planning application process on a complex application once consultees get involved and ask for clarification.”