Cyngor Bro Morgannwg
Vale of Glamorgan Council

Retain the site within open countryside, protected under relevant rural policies. Focus future growth where environmental and green infrastructure enhancement can be delivered, supporting the Vale’s biodiversity network and placemaking aspirations. Provide clear, transparent evidence (with up-to-date landscape and ecological assessments) for any Greenfield allocation before plan submission. Provide clear evidence that alternative sites are less appropriate before extending Cowbridge’s physical footprint.

Placemaking, character and place
Bryn Melin is in the Thaw Valley, a designated Special Landscape Area which the Vale of Glamorgan should protect.

Why, when there are many features that have the same impact as other areas of suggested Cowbridge sites, was the Bryn Melin deemed to be more suitable for development ? Why is this? Could it be because the owners of the field have already been chasing developers and therefore it looks to be a better financial option ?

May I remind you of BP 16 which states:-
“Where there are a few sites within a settlement, those which score overall proportionately positively against the criteria shall be ranked above those which result in a disproportionate number of negative scores”

Landscape and Character - Impact on community character and landscape
Development on this site would result in “urban sprawl” eroding the distinct character of the town and contribute to the gradual destruction of the “green lung” of Cowbridge.
It should be noted that the visual impact of the landscape would be totally destructive in so many ways.

Relationship to and compatibility with existing built form, layout, scale density, building types
It is interesting to note that in the colour banding system of grading land for development, Bryn Melin 370, gets green, 367 south of Llantwit Major gets amber ,and 455 Primrose Hill gets red. This system of grading seems to have ignored totally the Thaw Valley Special Landscape Area context. Why ?

Significance of the site to the area
Again, this demonstrates the same issue of the colour coding assigned to proposed potential development sites.
Again, 367 and 455 have been given a red coding and Bryn Melin and amber. Bryn Melin should be red.
Why is there a constant blatant disregard of the Special Landscape Area context ?

There would be significant impact upon the residents of Windmill Lane. This quiet, private, residential road would be turned into a pedestrian main thoroughfare. This leads to safety issues for those using it.
The lane is very narrow in places and there are concerns for those walking with pushchairs, young children, wheelchair and buggy users. In these narrow sections there would not be an adequate amount of room to allow safe passage.
NB - It should be noted that in the recent past the council had refused permission because in changing the character and route of a public footpath, it would detract from the existing local amenities. This path is important to so many locals in the area. This was further endorsed on appeal by the Inspector. It was stated that the value and length of the footpath crossing the site would considerably diminish once the site was built upon, whichever direction it took.

Visual Impact on landscape/streetscape/historic environment
Following on from the point made above noting Thaw Valley Special Landscape Area, sites 367 and 455 have a red rating for visual impact and Bryn Melin has an amber. Clearly this should be given a red status too.

Strain on local infrastructure and services/ Infrastructure and Service Capacity
Schools, medical and dentistry facilities are already under pressure due to the present number of residents living in Cowbridge.

Density of the proposal in relation to existing developments
Again, a lack of consistency and a total lack of adequate consideration when allocating the colour code for the Bryn Melin site.
Again, 367 and 455 have amber and Bryn Melin green ? What is the explanation for this ?

Access to Site vehicular movement/ Traffic and highway safety. Should the site be given over for residential construction the chaos that would occur during the construction process would be horrendous. The amount of HGV’s coming in and out of there would cause all sorts of chaos, leaving mud and all sorts of dirt on the road.
This is the main road from Cowbridge to St Athan and villages, the entrance to the site is on a left blind bend on a hill. The traffic already using the road would be competing with construction HGV’s.
Following on from that, should the site be used for residential properties the number of vehicles in the area would increase considerably. This would cause issues at peak times, during the daily rush hour and is already dangerous and chaotic around school drop off and pick up times.
As it stands, the entrance to the field is on a totally blind bend. The road is narrow, at present large vehicles cross over to the other side of the road to negotiate the bend. This makes it dangerous for other vehicles and poses a high risk to cyclists and pedestrians. It should be noted there are no pavements along this section of road.
Gaining access to the field would result in congestion and major safety issues as traffic would be waiting on the main road to turn right into the field, and on exiting, find themselves turning right blind to the main flow of traffic coming round the bend from the left.
It would be unlikely that potential residents would walk from this location which would intensify vehicular congestion and parking issues in the centre of the town.
How on earth can Bryn Melin only be given an amber. ?
This is so obviously a very dangerous red.
Access to public transport, pedestrian/cycle routes
Again, the colour coding seems to have gone awry here too.
Bryn Melin has a green. Sites 367 and 455 have amber.
Bryn Melin should be dangerous red
When comparing the sites it is obvious that Bryn Melin has the worst access of them all.

As previously stated, this development would lead to an increase in car usage. It is not safe enough or convenient enough to walk to public transport. There are no pavements for the use of pedestrians. The suggested walkways using Brookfield Park are not practical or even viable. They are too narrow, they can not be widened due to private property either side, and finally they are not even owned by the vendors of the field so therefore are not a realistic possibility at the moment.
There is certainly no room on St Athan Road for any cycle lanes, and the thought of push bikes competing with the main road traffic on that road is very concerning.

It should be noted that sites 367 and 455 have access to public transport adjacent and good pedestrian and cycle routes.

Unbelievably Bryn Melin does not even have a rating for the heading of Whether the site is available for all users.
Why has this been ignored ?
As previously mentioned, the poor access through Windmill Lane, dangerous access along St Athan Road and a non-realistic mention of access through Brookfield Park is actual proof of this.
It should also be mentioned that the proposed site has a 12% slope.
Again, sites 367 and 455 have been given amber but are obviously more accessible than 370.

Under the listing of Opportunities for enhancing green infrastructure/active travel
Bryn Melin receives a green rating, whilst 367 and 455 receive amber. This makes no sense.

With the evidence listed, the dangers of the private road Windmill Lane, and the suggested under minimum size walkway in Brookfield Park it does not seem credible.
The bus service from Cowbridge to the main employment centre of Cardiff is only accessible from along the main high street road and provides just two an hour.
Surely, they should be looking at improving existing transport hubs in Llantwit Major, Barry and Penarth for better city links and build housing there.

Flood risk drainage concerns
There has always been terrible drainage by the main gate onto St Athan Road. It has always been soggy boggy land at the bottom of the hill.
Greenfield land naturally absorbs rainfall. As previously mentioned, it is already a natural issue at the bottom of the field. Replacing it with hard surfaces such as roads, driveways and rooftops will increase surface water runoff and may exacerbate an already existing flood risk in the surrounding areas.

Loss of Green infrastructure and biodiversity – environmental impact
Potential development would result in the permanent loss of valuable greenfield space, which currently supports biodiversity, *local wildlife habitats, and natural ecosystems, destroying wildlife corridors.
Greenfield land plays an essential role in carbon absorption, flood mitigation and maintaining air quality.
The local wildlife we see in our garden coming in from the field behind us consist of badgers, foxes, rabbits, hedgehogs, owls, pheasants, green woodpeckers, lesser spotted woodpeckers, sparrowhawks and numerous other smaller birds. Photographic evidence can be provided of all of these in our garden.
Where will they go when their field is taken away from them ?
Not to forget that the developed site will lead to a significant increase in the Carbon footprint due to the layout and the inclination of the slope.

Placemaking outcome summary
Again, back to the colour coding system.
Bryn Melin is given green.
This is a complete and absolute refusal to acknowledge, and the blatant ignorance of, the Welsh Government directive to protect Special Landscape Areas.
Presented with all the evidence and information listed above it has to be category red.

The site is on the far edge of the town with no convenient access to public transport or safe pedestrian and cycle pathways. Development of this site would lead to an increase in traffic volume on a very dangerous section of St Athan Road. Firstly, for journeys made for work outside of Cowbridge and secondly, local traffic will also increase for shopping and leisure activities, along with schools, visits to doctors’ surgeries and dentists, also putting pressure on car parking facilities in the town. This is already under strain.

The RLDP should prioritise urban housing to meet housing targets, but they should be ensuring that a sustainable development is located near existing transport hubs and employment centres, rather than creating car-dependent “commuter estates”. This leads to urban sprawl, causing detrimental damage to local character and sense of place

The Cowbridge and Llanblethian local council unanimously opposed this sites inclusion in the RLDP and they are responsible for the Cowbridge placemaking plan.

The report states:
“Development of the site has the potential to enhance the character of the area and contribute positively to national sustainability and placemaking principles. A planning statement has been provided in support of the current planning permission which sets out how the proposal would respond its setting and location in relation to placemaking.”
Clearly this development can’t possibly enhance the character of the area when the landscape and a public footpath will be destroyed, and local wildlife habitats will be affected

Primrose Hill 455 is Amber
Development of site is likely to have a neutral / negligible effect on local character and sense of place (subject to the development providing mitigation measures and/or meeting specific policy requirements).

Land South of Llantwit Major Rd 367 is red.
Development of site will likely be detrimental to local character and sense of place

Emerging Placemaking Principles for Cowbridge
The draft Cowbridge Placemaking Plan emphasises local identity, sustainable growth, and protection/enhancement of town character, public spaces and the town-edge environment.

Allocating large greenfield land contrary to these principles undermines locally articulated placemaking ambitions. There appears to have been little or no involvement of the local council in identifying and discussing the local placemaking criteria and assessment of the various Cowbridge sites.

Cowbridge Town Council unanimously rejected the inclusion of Site 370 in the RLDP on 24/02/2026

Conclusion & Proposed Changes

Retain the site within open countryside, protected under relevant rural policies.

Focus future growth where environmental and green infrastructure enhancement can be delivered, supporting the Vale’s biodiversity network and placemaking aspirations.

Provide clear, transparent evidence (with up-to-date landscape and ecological assessments) for any Greenfield allocation before plan submission.

Provide clear evidence that alternative sites are less appropriate before extending Cowbridge’s physical footprint.