Gwrthwynebu
1 Ymgynghoriad ar Cynllun Datblygu Lleol Newydd
ID sylw: 6259
Derbyniwyd: 09/03/2026
Respondent ID: 3267
Ymatebydd: Mrs MICHELLE DAVIES
Cadarn? Heb nodi
I object to including Site ID 4069 East of Colwinston, citing concerns about flooding, overdevelopment, and the village’s capacity. I believe redrawing the boundary alters the rural, conservation area without sufficient justification, risking harm to heritage and landscape. The development conflicts with sustainability policies, has faced repeated adverse assessments, and lacks adequate resident consultation. Increased traffic, poor public transport links, and existing drainage issues further justify opposition. With seven houses for sale and current flooding problems, I see no need for additional development in the village.
I am objecting to the inclusion of grounds Site ID 4069 Land East of Colwinston.
I have listed my reasons below. I would also like to add that living near the field and observing the frequent flooding causes huge concern. Also with 7 houses in Heol Cae Pwll currently for sale on rightmove, that have been there for some time, raises the question of why more houses are needed in the village.
1. Redrawing of the Boundary Settlement to include site 4069 The site is part of the rural setting of the Conservation Area. Extending the current boundary fundamentally alters the settlement envelope and conflicts with the statutory duty to preserve or enhance. The proposal lacks sufficient specific justification is not supported by the impact assessment.
2. Heritage and landscape impact The village of Colwinston is identified as a County Treasure. Development would have a detrimental impact on the character and setting of the Conservation Area contrary to policy.
3. Integrated Site Appraisal Inclusion of this site is not supported by the Integrated Site Impact Assessment contravening almost all of the stated Sustainability Objectives within the LDP itself.
4. Inadequate Consultation with Residents The digital approach adopted in this consultation is likely to have excluded many people in the local community. From participating and responding.
5. Overdevelopment Taken together with recent developments in the village the proposed growth of the settlement is not proportionate to the scale of the historic village and is damaging to its conservation status and community cohesion. It is not supported by evidence of settlement based housing need.
6. Inconsistency Of Site Assessment over Time This site has been judged as unsuitable several previous occasions by the Local Authority. This change in decision is not supported by the continued adverse impact assessment and non compliance with its own and national policies.
7. Flood risk There are known drainage and flooding issues in and around this site together with sewerage system capacity connectivity issues with the Cowbridge Wastewater Treatment Works.
8. Highways increased levels of car use from the previous housing and primary school development has already adversely affected traffic flows, parking, safe walking and cycling throughout the whole village. The two A48 junctions do not meet current planning requirements. The Any improvements to village roads would have unacceptable character changing impacts.
9. Public transport and sustainable travel This site does not meet transport sustainability objectives. Colwinston lacks direct links to public transport (Greenlinks is an inadequate alternative) and increased traffic from development and the school already compromises safety for walking and cycling.