Eight councillors abstain from vote as further plans for 132 homes in Rossett approved

Further plans to build more than 130 new homes in Rossett were approved last night after eight councillors abstained from the vote, after finding themselves in a position where they felt they could not vote against the matter.

The controversial development on land to the north and south of Lane Farm was initially refused by Wrexham Council’s planning committee in January 2019 amid concerns over the loss of green land, the risk of flooding and the impact on pedestrian safety.

However, the decision to decline outline planning permission was overturned the following year after Welsh Government housing minister Julie James said the demand for more homes in Wrexham “significantly” weighed in favour of the plans.

Outstanding reserved matters, information excluded from the initial outline planning application such as layout and access for the 132 dwellings plan came before the committee last night.

More than 170 objections had been received by the local authority ahead of the meeting, including from Rossett Community Council.

In their submissions, members reiterated their worries over pedestrian safety and flooding issues.

Speaking at yesterday’s meeting planning officer Matthew Phillips reminded the committee several times that the application was not an opportunity to “reconsider the appeal” decision or the principle to build on the site.

A barrister spoke against the proposals, with the full support of the Rossett Focus Group and Community Council, who asked for the plans to be thrown out or at least, deferred. Mr Williams said via a slightly poor Zoom connection, “Outline planning permission was granted on the basis that there were no flooding issues. We now know this is untrue, incorrect and flawed. The developers have conceded this point by a purported wholesale amendment of the plans and design dealing with the likely fact that houses in the area will flood” adding “present houses in the area can’t get insured” due to flooding issues.

After detailing a range of issues Mr Williams picked out a statement in the report before councillors, “The officers report is worrying Mr. Phillips is wrong that permission cannot be revoked” “that is untrue. It’s wrong in law.”

The Chief Planning Officer had told councillors, “Whilst I am fully aware of the continued and considerable local opposition to the development, as indicated by the number of representations received, the principle of development (i.e. whether the site should or should not be developed) cannot be revisited. ”

The design and planning director of Castle Green Homes, Stuart Andrew, spoke in support of the proposals rejecting the idea that the committee could reject the entire plan, “The principle whether the sites would accommodate 132 new dwellings has already been decided nearly two years ago when outline planning permission was granted. The sites are also allocated for residential development in the council’s own draft local development plan. So we’re not here today to consider whether housing should be allowed –  housing is already approved”.

“In respect to the the most repeated concerns we point out the Natural Resource Wales, Welsh Water, the council’s highways department have all considered this application in detail and have no objection to approval of our scheme. It pains me to say this, but it should this submission be refused on these grounds then later this year a planning inspector is also extremely likely to consider the application acceptable – only at a cost to Wrexham taxpayers.”

Concerns were then raised again with Rossett councillor Hugh Jones telling the committee that there “has been a massive and overwhelming objection to the scheme and there is overwhelming concern in the community around the flooding issue.”

He said: “There has been significant and overwhelming evidence that has been submitted to officers of Wrexham County Borough Council to show that the calculations made by Natural Resources Wales are flawed.

“If you use the calculations for flooding used by Natural Resources Wales, none of the flooding events that have happened in the last 10 to 20 years in Rossett could have happened.

“The actual events, the actual flooding that has taken place has well exceeded the predictions made by Natural Resources Wales and overwhelming evidence has been submitted to officers countering Natural Resources Wales calculations.”

He also questioned the drainage plans for the site, stating that a portion of the recreational space was being taken up by “ponds in an attempt to mitigate the flooding.”

Cllr Jones pondered: “I wonder how many people can play football and how many children can play games at the bottom of a pond?”

“I wonder how many children’s lives are going to be put at risk having ponds of 1.6 metres depth in the middle of public open space and play areas – that is not public open space in my view.”

Addressing his comments, planning officer Matthew Phillips said: “The application is subject to a flood consequences assessment.

“In terms of flooding generally, and the reason why this site was granted planning permission without any concerns being raised by either the inspector or the minister, was because the site is not in an area where planning policy or national guidance in Wales advises that development shouldn’t take place. It’s not in a zone C2.

“That that is that is fundamentally why the issue was not raised as a concern. It is dealt with in the in the inspectors report and in the minister’s decision, but that is the reason why flooding is not a reason that prevented the site from going ahead.”

“In terms of the the consequences assessment, there has been questions raised by the submissions from NRW as the application has been considered and those issues have all been addressed by Natural Resources Wales and that is why Natural Resources Wales do not object to this application and do not have concerns with the flood consequences assessment, subject to the measures in the flood consequences assessment being implemented.

In terms of drainage on the site Mr Phillips explained that there would not be “ponds within open space”, adding that “they are basins” which are common on housing developments and are designed not to hold water all the time and will not be wet all of the time, and “don’t pose a safety risk”.

Cllr Dana Davies, Ruabon ward, queried an apparent much discussed issue around site access – with the community council claiming “the developers do not have the right to break through private land in Trevalyn Way” and the developers “are showing access adjacent to 1 Trevalyn Hall View on land they do not own”. Cllr Davies queried if there had been a change in access plans, noting access plans before and previously before the committee, “So the direct question is has access changed from that original planning application which was determined by the inspector, or is the access still the same?”

The meeting was told by the officer it was ‘still the same’.

Cllr Davies later proposed that a site visit took place to see how the development would look and what that “impact is going to be” in the countryside. Despite the concerns from committee members the proposal for a site visit was rejected by eight votes to seven.

With no actual material objections formed up by the committee to reject the application some councillors found themselves in a planning process pickle.

If they individually voted to refuse the plans they could have been left with the awkward position of then having a majority – perhaps accidentally – voting against, and therefore rejecting the proposal, however not having any actual stated reason for a refusal. Such a process would mean the decision would be easily overturned on appeal, and would cost Wrexham Council, and therefore taxpayers, money.

The issue was crystalised during the vote when Cllr Paul Roberts called for a point of clarity, wanting to know if he could vote against the proposal legally. Chair Cllr Mike Morris explained, “The difficulty I would have if we had more against this recommendation than for, we’ve got no reasons”.

Cllr Roberts joined in with councillors indicating they would abstain from the vote, rather than vote against.

The plans were eventually approved via seven members of the committee voting for it, with eight deciding to abstain from the vote.