There are further details about the proposals (slightly modified) on the Menstrie Community Council website
I notice some significant distortions here. For example, Tillhill are claiming that they have the 'acceptance' of the district archaeologist. This implies that he has 'approved' them and that the mitigation measures to avoid the archaeological sites are, therefore, adequate.
In fact, of course, with no statutory protection, the archaeologist cannot object to even the most ourtageous proposals but lack of a formal 'objection' is not the same as 'approval', in my book!
There is no doubt whatever that the proposals will effectively destroy the archaeological aspects of this side of the glen. In any case, the proposals recognise only the sites within Menstrie Glen, not those over the watershed which have not been surveyed.
So, it is rather rich of Tilhill to now claim the 'rich archaeological history' of Menstie Glen as somehow an argument in favour of the plans!