The newly-created national park authority is being recommended to refuse the application by Chas, the Children's Hospice Association Scotland.

The authority says the scheme does not comply with new rules on land use.

The film star, Ewan McGregor, who supports Chas, has expressed his anger at the move.

What's the best use of national park land? Should there be exemptions for projects like a children's hospice or are such plans simply being hindered by red tape?

Here are some of your views

Chas has had plans for this development for years. Maybe it is time to take notice of what the people want for a change.
Carolyn, Chicago, USA

There is a great need for more children's hospices throughout the UK. Come on, show you have a heart and conscience! Do the right thing and cut the red tape. We know it can be done. Let's give those that need facilities like Rachel House more not less choice.
Catherine, England

Chas have looked at over 40 sites before deciding the Balloch option was the best. The land has been gifted to them and it seems the ideal location, National Park or not. Of course there would be other equally good sites outwith the park, but would the Scottish Executive serve a compulsory purchase notice on other sites and grant the site to Chas free of charge? The Balloch site is on the boundary of the park. The best solution seems to be to move the boundary a few metres - then everyone is happy.
Grant Scholes, Scotland

These technocrats were giggling children once but obviously take their happy childhood memories for granted. To those who will never reach that age of nostalgic recollection they owe the chance to die in a beautiful and peaceful place. They will come round to this way of thinking or shall forever be haunted by the faces of those that they didn't help.
R.C. Robjohn, UK

We must meet our commitment to these children and their families. This hospice must be built on this lovely site.
Ann Green, Scotland

What better place for a hospice than at the edge of such beautiful and peaceful scenery? I'm all for it.
Stewart Goudie, UK

It's a shame that children in such dire need of love and care could be denied the usage of this parkland. It's a beautiful area and would do much to raise their spirits, and aid them in their final days. They don't have long upon this earth, it's a shame that there are those that would deny them the smallest bit of happiness that could be derived from such lovely surroundings.
Rhianna, USA and UK

Criticism of the officials involved is ill-founded and unfair

Martin Scotland

The new Hospice should be built as agreed. If planning permission is refused, the names of the people responsible should be published. Time for a protest march?
Sandra Walker, Scotland

I think that the councillors should approve the building of the hospice as a valuable addition to Loch Lomond.
Paul, Scotland

The children who we are talking about need quality of life. To deny them this is downright cruel. As a person who has battled against disability discrimination for a very long time I can see yet another disgusting display of "not on our doorstep please". This would benefit many children. The placement would be brilliant for children and I do feel that unless the authority can come up with a very viable and convincing argument it will be very damning upon them.
Mel , London

Criticism of the officials involved is ill-founded and unfair. It is their legal duty to give advice to the park board based upon the official guidance laid down. They have no discretion to do otherwise. The board does have discretion and can make a decision which does not follow the advice given - and they can make it clear in doing so that the decision is an exception and not a precedent.

Second, as a past member of the Secretary of State Working Party for Loch Lomond and the Trossachs, which I hope played its part in establishing the National Park, I would urge the Park Board to do exactly that. The National Park is a special place to be enjoyed by the whole nation.
Martin, Scotland

Loch Lomond should be there for all to enjoy regardless of one's health or disability. I would urge the local council/commission to go ahead with the construction plans.
Linda Cleaver, UK

These children and their families deserve all the care and love that can be given in the very best locations.
Mrs M Cameron, Scotland

I cannot think of a better location for children and their families to use at a time when peace and quiet are needed. Come on Scotland, let's hear your voice.
Mrs Anderson, Scotland

The new National Park is a perfect location for this hospice. I would rather see 10 hospices in this area than one shopping centre. It is obvious that the planners don't see the hospice as a good money making venture. We need to get our priorities right.
Billy, Scotland

It sounds to me that this hospice project was being planned before the National Park's boundaries were established. If that is so then what else can be 'cancelled', 'un-approved' or 'de-listed' retroactively? As for the needs of the children and their families. Studies show that anyone in ill health does better when they can see grass, trees, and nature. Let these special children enjoy peace and love, so that their families can remember their last days as being the best we as a society could provide.
Liz Powell, Canada

A National Park is the perfect place for a hospice. After all, it is there to show the wonders of nature to all and the sick are more needy that all others.
Robert Sinclair Shand, Scotland

Hospice is a beautiful program. It makes life easier not only for the patient, but their families as well. The final days before death is a time of deep reflection and I cannot think of a more serene and peaceful location as Loch Lomond. I believe that surroundings are equally important as the care of the program. I wonder if Cameron House and The Duck Bay Marina had as much red tape to cut through? I doubt it.
Hugh Adair, USA

I have to write to you to express how annoyed I am at the possibility of the new hospice not being constructed. I have spent time in Rachel House with my good friend of 15 years who suffers from muscular dystrophy. I have seen first hand the incredible work and dedication of the staff. I cannot comprehend how any person could refuse planning permission for a new hospice.

I am ashamed of the so-called 'powers that be' in the planning application for a new hospice for the west of Scotland

Christine Hughes, Scotland

The people who are refusing this permission should take a long hard look at themselves and see what their real motive behind their refusal is. I am at this point trying to refrain from using strong language but these simple people have infuriated me. I will be supporting the hospice in their bid and I urge all those who read this to do the same.
Peter Healy, Scotland

I am ashamed of the so-called 'powers that be' in the planning application for a new hospice for the west of Scotland. I am one of the many people who have used the hospice over the past year. I have a grandchild who has a life threatening illness. Rachel House has allowed us to heal as a family, the pain that such terrible prognosis of a child you love can do, in the only place that it is possible to do so. All staff and friends of this wonderful place are working in a job that our National Park administers can only try to imagine. The likes of them should be forced as part of their job to work for free with the team of Rachel House. Only then will they see the courage and equanimity present in this lovely part of the country.

Each child is different and so is their illness. Many live for many years with their illness and places like this hospice allow them to have a holiday as a family that normally would not be possible because of medical barriers with insurance and travel. I pray that the people who make this decision examine their conscience before God and man and remember to put humanity into the result.
Christine Hughes, Scotland

It seems that the children who would be cared for in the hospice will have precious little time to appreciate the beauty most of us have our whole lives to enjoy. It would therefore be both logical and compassionate to build the hospice in such a charming location.
K, UK

It truly beggars belief that anyone would advise against building a children's hospice on the grounds that it would ruin the countryside. I feel so angry because of narrow minded unfeeling people who have also had the wool pulled over their eyes by a report which does not truly represent the ideas and plans put forward by Chas. From what I've heard, the only way you will be able to see the building once it's up is by helicopter. How can this spoil the area? There is of course a lot more to this and thankfully Chas has Tuesday to try and get people to see sense. I just think a country park is the most suitable site for this building and I just wish I could say, "In my back garden please".
Ann Anderson, Scotland.

What is Loch Lomond National Park? It certainly does not conform to the perceived notion of an untouched, large expanse of natural wilderness. It is a place where people work the land and live. If the planning authority sees fit to build a rather awkward looking visitor/shopping centre on the edge of the loch, then they're refusal to grant permission to a hospice is a poor show of compassion. For those who haven't been to Scotland's first national park - it is more in the mind than on the map. Balloch is a bustling small town. The idea that a children's hospice might in some way upset the natural wonders is to be perfectly honest a farce (speaking as one who works in nature conservation).
Stephanie, Glasgow, Scotland

As someone who frequently travels the Scottish countryside, I realise how beautiful it is. I fail to see what the problem is with giving these children a beautiful and peaceful environment. The majority of the beautiful countryside I visit has fencing around it because of snobs who want all the land. At least the children deserve the small space they need. There should be no argument. And those people against it should learn to stop being so selfish.
Lynne, Scotland

Let these children, and my brother, end their lives peacefully

Tina McGinlay Scotland

My brother is a boy who goes to Rachel House, he suffers from muscular dystrophy and his life span has been shortened by it.

With another hospice there would be room for more people and more time to spend there. I have met lots of people who go there, some who have died but everyone loved it there, it made their precious time here special.

The people who are refusing the permission should spend some time there. I go there often with my brother and have witnessed the wonderful things that the staff do.

Help to make even more children's time here special by letting them have such a beautiful scenery for them and their families to enjoy.

Most of us have all our lives to look forward to and won't die for a long time. These children haven't, so why not let them enjoy what time they have left here.

Let these children, and my brother, end their lives peacefully!
Tina McGinley, Scotland

Why does the hospice have to built at that specific location? Moving it a few miles away from the proposed location won't make any difference to the standard of care which children receive.

Let's face it, what goes on inside the hospice is more important than the surroundings.

It's important not to allow emotion to cloud our logic. Nobody is saying that the hospice can't be built. It's simply a question of the location.
James Ingram, UK

Whilst I fully concur that the Trossachs National Park is without doubt a "national treasure", it is equally valid to say that Chas is another "national treasure".

Having been privileged enough to have first hand knowledge of both the National Park and the invaluable contribution that Chas makes to Scottish society, I fully believe that the two should be linked by the building of Scotland's second hospice at the Balloch site.

Surely there can be no better place for the children and their families to benefit from respite care than in the idyllic surroundings of the National Park.

This project is supported by the local populace, the councillors and our politicians; it is time for the rest of the Scottish people to offer their full support too. You have mine.
Ian Cowie, Scotland

Of course it should still be built, more so now than ever. What a beautiful place it would be for these children to spend their last days on this earth!!
Joanne, The Netherlands (ex Scotland)

It is a disgrace that the plans are to be changed at this late stage. This is more important than the edge of a large national park.

Indeed it could be a good point in that it would show that Scotland cares about more than just parkland which would be used by the residents of the hospice
Derek Brant, Scotland

A children's hospice is a "good thing" but then so are houses for people to live in.

We don't (or shouldn't) build the latter in Green Belt/Conservation Are/Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty or Scientific Interest.

Same applies to the former. Otherwise the "rules" (such as they are) get bent depending on who is making the application.
Phil, UK

Rachel House does so much good and Chas should have the opportunity to expand its services

Mary, Scotland

What is so wrong about having a hospice in beautiful surroundings like the Loch Lomond area?

Rachel House does so much good and Chas should have the opportunity to expand its services.

Yes, planning decisions must be made in line with existing legislation, but decisions should also be made on the benefit a project is likely to have.

If the response from consultees has been positive, why hold it to ransom like this?
Mary, Scotland

There should of course be proper consideration given to such matters, but they should be decided on a case-by-case basis.

This particular application is absolutely worthy of agreement. The bulk of the groups and the individuals who commented on the application either actively support it or made it clear that they do not object to it.

This is a classic case of public nerves from a bureaucrat who is after all only the acting (and soon to be replaced) planning adviser in a new authority that may want to be seen either, at worst, to flex its muscles or, at best, to avoid controversy.

The good thing is they have until 10 December to get themselves sorted out and to reject the advice they are being given, for advice is all it is.
Denis Mooney, Scotland

I totally agree that there should be no building on the park! Not ever!

This amounts to emotive blackmail!

There is loads of land surrounding the area that could be used for this most important project.

Using these children in this manner is a disgrace!
Eileen, UK

Of course it should be allowed. I would have thought that anyone with an ounce of compassion would want sick children to be able to spend the time they have left in as comfortable and beautiful environment as possible?
Mark Mitchell, Scotland