Green belt land close to a conservation area that would completely change the nature of old Llangan and intrude on current residents, very poor choice of land

The proposed site is adjacent to existing residential housing in a small village with limited services, infrastructure, and public transport. The location is not sustainable and would increase reliance on private vehicles, contrary to national and local planning policies promoting sustainable development. There are already a family within the area which the village has accommodated for many years.

Thank you for your email.

It has since become apparent that the village WhatsApp group was incorrectly informed in suggesting that the land adjacent to Twchwyn Garth was being proposed as a traveller site. I understand that this site has instead been identified for affordable housing. While I appreciate the need for such provision, I would like to raise concerns, as our village already accommodates a significant amount of affordable housing in close proximity, including developments at Timbers Green, Fferm Goch, and Canna (adjacent to the school). I therefore feel that Llangan has already made a substantial contribution in this regard.

In relation to the existing Traveller site (Site 403), my understanding is that following a court case approximately five years ago, it was agreed that the family currently occupying this site would relocate further up the road to join the rest of their family. At that time, it was also agreed that the original site would be returned to the village of Llangan for use as allotments. This resolution followed considerable effort, distress, and financial contribution from local residents to resolve the matter.

I fully recognise and respect the need for Traveller families to have appropriate and secure places to live. However, I believe that Llangan has been more than accommodating to the existing families over many years, and I am concerned about the cumulative impact of further development on a small rural village with already limited infrastructure.

While recognising the importance of affordable housing provision, the proposed concentration of tenure type in a small rural settlement risks undermining the objective of creating a genuinely mixed and balanced community.

Given the scale of Llangan as a rural village, the proportion of affordable housing proposed appears disproportionate when considered against overall settlement size and infrastructure capacity.

Affordable housing need should be addressed through a distributed model across sustainable settlements rather than concentrated in smaller rural villages where access to employment and services is limited.

Re403, land East of Llangan. This is low lying and hence often wet and flooded grazing pasture on the edge of the village. There are no amenities in the village and the local school is, I understand full. All four access lanes have at least two sections of single file road. Increasing traffic on these narrow and heavily pot holed lanes will create significant problems. There is strong local objection to this being developed.

The scale of the site is inappropriate for the small rural village of Llangan, which is a protected conservation area. There is no bus service or facilities in the village so all journeys will by necessity be made by car. Llangan village is on a hill as the whole area is extremely prone to flooding and very damp ground. The site is on lower ground where several streams join and often flood both the lane and the fields. All the lanes leading to the village flood.

There is no public transport and the site is not reasonably accessible to day-to-day services, such as medical facilities, shops and community facilities.
The proposed expansion of the site goes against the VOG’s objective to reduce the need for travel for VOG residents to meet their daily needs.
The site is in a Special Landscape Area and therefore the proposed development would be contrary to the VOG’s object to protect and enhance the VOG’s historic, built and natural environment.

The site is located in the rural Vale, surrounded by open countryside and 7 miles from Cowbridge and 8 miles from Bridgend. The scale of the site is completely out of character with the close by hamlet of Llangan . Anyone living in this location will rely on private cars to get to and from the site for work, shops and everything except the primary school that is within walking distance via an unlit road with no pavements. The nearest small shop is in Pencoed to which there is no public transport. Otherwise it is necessary to drive to Cowbridge or Bridgend or one of the large supermarkets on the edge of Bridgend. Access to the site is via small single lane country roads that are not suited to high volume traffic or emergency services. In addition, the area is a C2 flooding zone, making it unsuitable for building.

I strongly object to the proposed development of this field due to several concerns.
Our property is already at high risk of surface water flooding according to Natural Resources Wales, and building on the adjacent field would significantly increase runoff. The field is bordered by streams that have previously flooded.
Access is via a very narrow single track road unsuitable for large vehicles, and from Bridgend it requires crossing a clearly marked weight-restricted bridge near our home.
The field is also valuable agricultural grazing land, and development would damage the local countryside and surrounding hedgerow habitats.

The sites are located in the rural Vale, surrounded by open countryside and 7 miles from Cowbridge and 8 miles from Bridgend. The scale of the site is completely out of character with the local area. Realistically, anyone living in this location will rely on private cars to get to and from the site for work, shops and everything except the primary school, which is full. The nearest small shop is in Pencoed to which there is no public transport. Otherwise it is necessary to drive to Cowbridge or Bridgend or one of the large supermarkets on the edge of Bridgend. Access to the site is via small single lane country roads that are not suited to high volume traffic or emergency services.

The site is located in the rural Vale, surrounded by open countryside and 7 miles from Cowbridge and 8 miles from Bridgend. The scale of the site is completely out of character with the close by hamlet of Llangan . Anyone living in this location will rely on private cars to get to and from the site for work, shops and everything except the primary school that is within walking distance via an unlit road with no pavements. The nearest small shop is in Pencoed to which there is no public transport. Otherwise it is necessary to drive to Cowbridge or Bridgend or one of the large supermarkets on the edge of Bridgend. Access to the site is via small single lane country roads that are not suited to high volume traffic or emergency services. In addition, the area is a C2 flooding zone, making it unsuitable for building.

Any development would be too large and unsustainable compared to the size of Llangan village. In addition, the area is a C2 flooding zone, making it unsuitable for building.

The sites are located in the rural Vale, surrounded by open countryside and 7 miles from Cowbridge and 8 miles from Bridgend. The scale of the site is completely out of character with the local area. Realistically, anyone living in this location will rely on private cars to get to and from the site for work, shops and everything except the primary school, which is full. The nearest small shop is in Pencoed to which there is no public transport. Otherwise it is necessary to drive to Cowbridge or Bridgend or one of the large supermarkets on the edge of Bridgend. Access to the site is via small single lane country roads that are not suited to high volume traffic or emergency services.

Access into the old llangan village is limited as is with the small single track lane into the village. Used as a through road through to bridgend so already too busy for the size of village. No amenities for new site.

The access road to llangan is very narrow.
Children often play in the culvert opposite this field - increased traffic will pose a threat to their safety.
I fear building on this filed would cause flooding

The site is located in the rural Vale, surrounded by open countryside and 7 miles from Cowbridge and 8 miles from Bridgend. The scale of the site is completely out of character with the close by hamlet of Llangan . Anyone living in this location will rely on private cars to get to and from the site for work, shops and everything except the primary school that is within walking distance via an unlit road with no pavements. The nearest small shop is in Pencoed to which there is no public transport. Otherwise it is necessary to drive to Cowbridge or Bridgend or one of the large supermarkets on the edge of Bridgend. Access to the site is via small single lane country roads that are not suited to high volume traffic or emergency services. In addition, the area is a C2 flooding zone, making it unsuitable for building.

I strongly object to the proposed site being used for housing.
This is due to:
- Significant flooding risk to our home and to others. Natural Resources Wales have deemed the property's at Twchwyn Garth, CF35 5EF at “high risk of flooding from surface water and small watercourses”. Building on the field immediately next to our property would significantly increase surface water volume.
- The sewage pumping station located on the land already releases storm water overflow into the Nant ganna at times of heavy rainfall.
- The field has streams on two of its borders, both of which have previously flooded.
- Safety concerns over vehicle access to the field as it is down a single track road which is far too narrow for any large vehicles.
- Access from the Bridgend direction would also be over a clearly marked "weight restricted" bridge. This bridge is very close to our property and any damage to it could put our house at structural risk.
- The field is an agricultural asset for grazing
- Any building would harm the intrinsic beauty of the local countryside, also putting the delicate habitats of the surrounding hedgerows at risk.
- there is no local infrastructure to support additional housing in terms of shops, cafes, play areas, transport links.

The site should be removed from the RLDP- it is on a flood plane, access is down a single track road that is already congested at certain times. There is no footpath or street lighting. There are no local amenities and nearest medical facilities, shops etc are some 5 miles away , there is no public transport. Homeowners will have to drive everywhere. Generally the infra structure including sewage removal will need substantial upgrading. There are no play areas for children close to this site.

The site contradicts many of the VOG’s own policies .

o There is no public footpath near the site and no street lighting.
o There is no public transport and the site is not reasonably accessible to day-to-day services, such as medical facilities, shops and community facilities. Cowbridge is around 7.5km from the site.
The primary school is already at capacity.
The village is in a rural area and further development on Green land risks this important area and negatively impacts the countryside.

403 Land east of Llangan. Unsuitable for development due to flooding potential. This is a constant concern for residents adjacent to proposed site. Further stress on local infrastructure particularly drains, roads, school places , lack of public transport.

1. Conflict with the RLDP Spatial Strategy
1.1 The RLDP’s spatial strategy seeks to direct housing growth to sustainable locations, prioritising:
1.1.1 Well-connected settlements;
1.1.2 Locations with good access to services, facilities and employment; and
1.1.3 Development that reinforces, rather than undermines, settlement form.
1.2 The Site:
1.2.1 Is poorly related to the existing settlement patterns;
1.2.2 Represents an outward expansion that risks fragmented or dispersed growth; and
1.2.3 Does not clearly demonstrate how development would integrate with the existing built form in a manner consistent with the Plan’s strategy.
1.3 The location of the site therefore undermines the RLDP’s stated approach to sustainable growth and settlement hierarchy.

2. Unsustainable location and transport accessibility
2.1 Planning Policy Wales requires development to minimise the need to travel and to prioritise active travel and sustainable transport.
2.2 In respect of the Site:
2.2.1 There is insufficient evidence that the site is located within convenient walking distance of everyday services and facilities;
2.2.2 Public transport is essentially non-existent; and
2.2.3 Development would be likely to result in increased reliance on private car travel, contrary to the national policy and the VOG’s climate objectives.
2.3 The RLDP evidence base does not robustly demonstrate that these sites can support genuine modal shift or deliver sustainable travel patterns.

3. Landscape, countryside and settlement character
3.1 The VOG is characterised by a sensitive and distinctive landscape, with clear settlement edges and areas of open countryside, contributing to local character.
3.2 The allocation of the Site would:
3.2.1 Result in the loss of undeveloped land that performs an important landscape and/ or settlement function;
3.2.2 Risk erosion of settlement identity through incremental outward expansion; and
3.2.3 Cause harm to the visual and rural setting of affected communities.
3.3 Where sites lie within or adjacent to Special Landscape Areas of valued countryside, national and local policy requires strong justification. That justification has not been demonstrated.

4. Failure to deliver high-quality placemaking
4.1 Placemaking is identified in the RLDP as a central objective. However, the Site raises significant concerns in this regard:
4.1.1 The location and constraints risk development that is peripheral, car-dominated and poorly integrated;
4.1.2 Opportunities to create walkable neighbourhoods with a strong sense of place appear limited; and
4.1.3 There is a real risk that development would result in standardised estate layouts, rather than distinctive, locally responsive places.
4.2 The evidence does not show that development on these sites could achieve the quality of placemaking required by the national policy and RLDP.

5. Infrastructure capacity and deliverability
5.1 For the Site to be soundly allocated, the VOG must demonstrate that they it is deliverable within the plan period and supported by appropriate infrastructure.
5.2 In relation to the Site:
5.2.1 There is insufficient clarity regarding highway capacity, safe access and mitigation;
5.2.2 Local services and facilities are already under pressure, with no firm delivery strategy identified;
5.2.3 The infrastructure implication of allocating multiple sites in proximity have not been adequately addressed (as there are other candidate sites close by, namely 398, 401, 402, 468, 2671 & 4068).
5.3 As such, the effectiveness and deliverability of the allocation is not demonstrated.

6. Failure to justify the need for the Site
6.1 The RLDP must show that the Site allocation is necessary, having regard to reasonable alternatives.
6.2 The evidence does not demonstrate that:
6.2.1 More suitable or less sensitive sites have been exhausted;
6.2.2 Previous development land opportunities have been prioritised to the extent required by national policy; or
6.2.3 The Site is required to meet identified housing need.
6.3 Without such justification, the allocation of the Site fails the tests of soundness.

7. Cumulative impact
7.1 When considered collectively with other candidate sites in close proximity to the Site (namely candidate sites 398, 401, 402, 468, 2671 & 4068), allocation of the Site would result in:
7.1.1 Excessive growth pressure on certain settlements;
7.1.2 Incremental erosion of countryside and landscape character; and
7.1.3 Development that is inconsistent with a plan-led, sustainable strategy.
7.2 The cumulative impacts have not been adequately assessed or addressed.

8. Conclusion
8.1 For the reasons set out above, the Site is:
8.1.1 Unsustainably located;
8.1.2 Likely to cause unacceptable harm to landscape and settlement character;
8.1.3 Inadequately supported by infrastructure and deliverability evidence; and
8.1.4 Not justified by housing need or the consideration of alternatives.
8.2 The Site should therefore be removed from the RLDP, or the Plan found unsound insofar as it relies upon its allocation.