Gwrthwynebu
1 Ymgynghoriad ar Cynllun Datblygu Lleol Newydd
ID sylw: 6298
Derbyniwyd: 09/03/2026
Respondent ID: 3527
Ymatebydd: Mr Kevin Darke
Cadarn? Heb nodi
I object to including Site ID 4069 in the LDP due to unjustified boundary changes, heritage and landscape damage, and failure to meet planning policies and sustainability objectives. The site’s inclusion threatens the village’s Conservation Area status, conflicts with policies, and is not supported by impact assessments. Concerns also include inadequate resident consultation, overdevelopment, past unsuitable assessments, flood risk, traffic issues, and poor public transport links. I believe the proposal would cause irreversible harm to Colwinston’s character and community cohesion.
I am objecting to the inclusion of grounds Site ID 4069 Land East of Colwinston on two principal grounds. These are:
1. The unjustified redrawing of the settlement boundary to include candidate site 4069
2. inclusion of this site for affordable housing, being unsustainable and unviable and likely to cause significant irreversible damage to village heritage status.
The inclusion of this site is it fails to reflect planning policies and LDP objectives. It fails on the majority of Impact Sustainability objectives and should not be approved for inclusion in the final LDP.
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. 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.