St Giles Parish Church in Wrexham c Leon S on Unsplash

Wrexham Council has decided to leave the 20mph speed limit in the rear view mirror. Credit: Leon S on Unsplash

Wrexham planning saga takes another twist

Councillors led by Cllr Marc Jones have reacted angrily to a Welsh Government appeal to the Supreme Court, the latest stage of a long-running row over Wrexham’s local plan.

In December, the Court of Appeal effectively overturned a 2023 High Court ruling that had compelled the council to adopt a Local Development Plan that had long troubled councillors.

Having previously voted twice to reject adoption, a group of councillors were given leave to head to the Court of Appeal in a decision last summer, ultimately leading the group to face off against the local authority, Welsh Government and a consortium of developers.

Following the December decision, the Welsh Government has set in motion an appeal to the Supreme Court, the highest level of the UK judiciary.

A Welsh Government spokesperson told Place North West: “The Welsh Ministers have applied to the Supreme Court for permission to appeal the Court of Appeal’s judgment. As this is ongoing litigation, we cannot comment further.”

Background

First put into motion in 2012, the Wrexham Local Development Plan 2013.2028 has long been contested by councillors, who maintained throughout various stages that projections were inaccurate and infrastructure provision insufficient, with affordable homes later also coming into play as a point of contention.

Of particular concern has been plans for two major urban extensions around Wrexham, with councillors believing tackling empty homes, and progressing already-consented sites should take precedence.

In essence, the Wrexham LDP is a strategic development framework that allocates space for more than 8,000 homes and 111 acres of employment space in the county.

The draft plan was declared sound by planning inspectors in 2018, but struggled to find support.

In both April and June of 2023 a cross-party majority of Wrexham Council members voted to reject it, in the face of planning officer advice. This led a consortium of frustrated developers to initiate judicial proceedings, at which Mr Justice Eyre ruled that Wrexham had “no discretion” but to adopt the plan.

With this in mind, the council’s monitoring officer stepped in, warning councillors that they must vote to approve the LDP, with potential consequences being contempt of court proceedings.

Amid large-scale abstentions, the plan was voted through in December 2023, as recorded here by Place North West.

2024 – the saga continues

Adoption was not the end of the matter. Leading a group of dissatisfied councillors, Cllr Marc Jones, leader of the Plaid Cymru group in the council, headed an appeal against the council, Welsh Ministers and the seven developers: BDW Trading (Barratt David Wilson), Redrow, Bloor Homes, Harworth Estates Investments, Russell Homes, Castle Green Homes and SG Estates – although Russell, Castle Green and SG did not take part in this appeal.

The central issue of the case boiled down to contention over a single line amid swathes of legislation: namely, whether Section 67 of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 confers a power on a local planning authority to adopt a local development plan if an Inspector recommends adoption, or if it imposes a duty.

The respondents’ position was that the 2004 legislation, strengthened by two subsequent Acts, was that a development plan of some kind was and is a must. The appellant contended that LPAs continue to have a discretion on adopting plans.

Following a hearing over two days in October, Lord Justice Holgate handed down a verdict five days before Christmas  – one year exactly from the formal adoption of the local plan – finding in favour of the appellant, ie that a local authority can decide whether or not to adopt a plan in line with an inspector’s recommendations.

Both other judges who heard the case, Lord Justice Baker and Sir Keith Lindblom, the senior president of tribunals, agreed with Lord Justice Holgate.

Lord Justice Holgate concluded that “the PCPA 2004 does not impose a duty on a LPA in Wales to adopt a LDP which, following the examination process, the Inspector has recommended for adoption. It follows that the resolutions passed by WCBC on 19 April 2023 and 14 June 2023 were not unlawful. I would therefore allow this appeal and dismiss the third to ninth respondents’ claim for judicial review.”

The councillors speak

In response to the Welsh Ministers’ actions in taking the case up the legal ladder, the councillors led by Cllr Jones issued a statement, expressing “grave concern” in continuing to pursue the matter, with only three years left until the LDP’s original timeframe ends.

In a joint statement, the councillors said: “We are deeply concerned that the Welsh Government is continuing its legal challenge against the right of local councils to decide what’s best for their area. The councillors’ case was funded by themselves and others in the community; the Welsh Government is spending more taxpayers’ money to try to win a case that was demolished in the Court of Appeal.

“Who in the Welsh Government has authorised this fresh appeal? Which Government minister approved it at a time when they should have a laser-like focus on sorting out the NHS, reducing child poverty and pensioners left out in the cold?

“Our case is simple – we want a plan that meets the needs of Wrexham. We don’t agree with the plan Inspectors want to impose on us and we have the right to reject it. That was the Court of Appeal’s clear ruling.

“The Welsh Government has sided with the developers not local democracy at every step of the way. Why? Is it a personal attack? Is it because the Government ministers don’t want councils to challenge their authority?

“Why are they so determined to push through this plan against local wishes, against their own targets for affordable housing and against the majority of Wrexham councillors elected to represent the people?”

Wrexham Council has been contacted for comment.

Your Comments

Read our comments policy

The councillors speak of wasting money by Welsh Government. Yet this is a Plan that was ratified by Councillors to be issued to the Inspectors, for Examination in Public. The same councillors that refused to adopt a Plan found sound by the Inspectors. What about the wasted years and public/private money used to prepare and examine the Plan? A Plan that is set to deliver much needed housing and importantly, affordable housing, to be delivered in an area with acute affordability issues, made worse by a significant lack of housing delivery over the last decade. The plan process and Examination is local democracy, so why is the will of the respective councillors more democratic than that of a formal Plan consultation/Examination process for which the public and councillors are part of? By those councillors not adopting the plan, was this not going against local democracy? Which democracy carries more weight?

By Anonymous

The elephant in the room here is that Wrexham sits on the edge of NorthWest greenbelt, and picks up demand displaced from Chester and Wirral. It always amuses me that they want to Borderlands line to directly connect with Liverpool like its somehow disconnected from housing demand. You also see South Cheshire folks move over the border for cheaper housing once they have their kids locked into the English school system.

By Rich X

And if that happened everywhere and succeeded local Councillors would end up running the country. A ridiculous situation, Wrexham needs economic growth (or even development) and the actions here will put off inward investors (other than a couple of americans with different motivations)

By Biwrocratiaeth ar waith

This really is an utter shambles. Wrexham are obviously bidding to overtake Stockport and others as the laughing stock of the North West.

By Lee

13 years in appeals, isnt the plan horribly outdated now?

By Watcherzero

Wrexham Council are hindering economic growth and employment in the area. The government should intervene like they did with Liverpool council but on different grounds.

By Anonymous

Related Articles

Sign up to receive the Place Daily Briefing

Join more than 13,000 property professionals and receive your free daily round-up of built environment news direct to your inbox

Subscribe

Join more than 13,000 property professionals and sign up to receive your free daily round-up of built environment news direct to your inbox.

By subscribing, you are agreeing to our Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy.

"*" indicates required fields

Your Job Field*
Other regional Publications - select below