Gwrthwynebu
1 Ymgynghoriad ar Cynllun Datblygu Lleol Newydd
ID sylw: 6427
Derbyniwyd: 10/03/2026
Respondent ID: 1564
Ymatebydd: Ms Jen Sullivan
Cadarn? Nac Ydi
The objector notes the site was previously rejected (2011-2026 LDP) due to "insurmountable constraints," including countryside intrusion and highway issues, which they argue remain unresolved.
The site sits entirely within a designated Green Wedge. The objector argues that developing ~250 homes would result in the physical coalescence of Dinas Powys and Llandough, violating PPW Paragraph 3.78 and undermining the original purpose of the designation.
There is a challenge regarding the "Candidate Site Assessment" (BP18A). The objector points out that smaller, adjacent sites (e.g., Sites 356, 419, 423) were rejected for Green Wedge harm, yet this larger site was progressed without clear justification for the differential treatment.
The objector claims the Station Road/Cardiff Road junction is already at capacity. They argue the RLDP lacks updated junction modelling, cumulative impact assessments, or funded mitigation.
The "aspirational" shift to active travel is challenged. Concerns include the lack of accessibility at Eastbrook Station (no lift/crossing) and the insufficiency of current bus/rail services to meet increased demand.
Concerns are raised over the lack of a settlement-specific capacity study. The objector highlights a perceived lack of transparency regarding how previous Section 106 contributions (e.g., Taylor Wimpey) were utilized to increase local capacity.
There is no confirmed capacity or infrastructure sequencing plan from Dwr Cymru Welsh Water for wastewater and sewerage upgrades.
The site is described as prone to surface water flooding. The objector argues that developing the site will displace water, increasing flood risk to the existing village, and that current modelling fails to account for climate change allowances.
The objector contests current monitoring, noting it was conducted in open fields rather than at sensitive receptors (like schools). They argue that 250 homes will alter dispersion dynamics and worsen air quality.
The site is identified as Grade 2/3a (BMV) land. The objector argues the RLDP fails to demonstrate the "overriding need" required by PPW to justify the loss of high-quality agricultural soil.
The objection lists specific protected or notable species (Bats, Tawny Owls, Sparrowhawks, etc.) whose natural habitat would be lost.
The proposal is viewed as a disproportionate extension that ignores local character and settlement identity.
The objector contends the allocation is "numbers-driven" rather than based on sensitive placemaking principles or community wellbeing.