The Secretary of State will make the final decision on an appeal for up to 800 homes on Green Belt land at Patshull Road, Albrighton. The proposal also includes a care home of up to 80 units, a secondary school and a local centre.
The appeal was recovered by a direction dated 16th September 2026, which Shropshire Council announced the following day. The inquiry continues, but the Inspector will now report to the Secretary of State rather than determine the appeal himself.
The decision could become a useful reference for practitioners applying the August 2026 National Planning Policy Framework. For now, however, recovery changes who decides the appeal. It does not establish whether the development should be approved. Shropshire Council’s announcement
What has been recovered at Albrighton?
Boningale Developments Limited is appealing against Shropshire Council’s refusal of an outline application, reference 24/02108/OUT. The appeal reference is 6007402.
The application includes access details for the mixed development, together with infrastructure, landscaping and drainage. It concerns land south of Albrighton, with a site area of approximately 48 hectares recorded in the appeal form. Appeal form
This is a different site and proposal from the Old Shackerley Lane cottage-remains appeal recently covered by Planning Geek. That case concerned whether a former cottage site was previously developed land. The Patshull Road appeal concerns a substantial mixed development on the edge of the settlement.
Why the Secretary of State is taking the decision
The recovery direction identifies proposals raising important or novel issues of development control and/or legal difficulties, and proposals for significant development in the Green Belt. These are the reasons for ministerial determination. They do not decide the merits of the scheme. Recovery direction dated 16th September 2026
In a recovered planning appeal, the Inspector continues to hear and test the evidence. The Inspector then prepares a report and recommendation. The final decision is made on behalf of the Secretary of State, taking that recommendation into account. Government guidance on recovered appeals
Inspector Andrew McGlone is conducting the Albrighton inquiry. Recovery does not remove the need for the parties to support their positions with evidence, nor does it provide a reliable signal of the eventual outcome.
The central dispute is whether the grey belt route applies
The council and appellant are advancing competing cases under the August 2026 NPPF and its Green Belt and grey belt policies. The council argues that the scheme is inappropriate development in the Green Belt. The appellant argues that it satisfies the grey belt provisions.
The council’s opening statement identifies a central disagreement: whether Albrighton is a large built-up area and whether the proposal would amount to sprawl. These questions matter when considering the site’s contribution to Green Belt purposes. The council accepts that homes, affordable housing and a care home would deliver benefits, but maintains that the scheme is too large for its location. Council opening statement, paragraphs 3 to 10
The appellant’s opening submissions rely on Policy GB7(1)(g), including its grey belt, unmet need, sustainable location and Golden Rules requirements. Boningale also advances an alternative case that very special circumstances justify permission if its grey belt argument fails. These remain the appellant’s submissions, not findings by the Inspector or Secretary of State. Appellant’s opening submissions, paragraphs 7 to 17
Under the August 2026 NPPF, grey belt status alone is insufficient for the GB7(1)(g) route. The other requirements must also be met. Where development is inappropriate, Policy GB6 requires the relevant Green Belt harm and any other harm to be clearly outweighed by other considerations before very special circumstances exist.
The inquiry reaches beyond Green Belt classification
The Inspector’s main issues also cover the development plan’s spatial strategy, the area’s character and appearance, access to services, agricultural land and heritage effects.
They include whether adequate provision would be made for affordable housing, transport, education, healthcare, open space, ecology, drainage and biodiversity net gain. These are matters for assessment and, where appropriate, secured mitigation. The fact that a school or other facility appears in a proposal does not itself settle its need, delivery or weight in the planning balance. Inspector’s case-management note, paragraphs 17 to 30
Albrighton Development Action Group is participating as a Rule 6 party. Its opening statement challenges the scheme’s location and transport accessibility, including walking, cycling and bus provision, and the relationship between the proposed development and the existing centre. Rule 6 opening statement, paragraphs 6 to 11
Check the latest Albrighton inquiry programme
The inquiry opened on 15th September 2026 at the Guildhall in Shrewsbury. The council’s public notice lists twelve sitting dates: 15th to 18th and 22nd to 25th September, followed by 6th to 9th October 2026. Council inquiry information
The linked programme is more specific and remains subject to change. It currently anticipates online sessions on 6th and 7th October for obligations, conditions and closing submissions, potentially combined into one day if progress permits. It would therefore be misleading to describe every date through 9th October as a confirmed sitting. Anyone attending should check the latest inquiry programme first.
Why practitioners should follow the eventual decision
Planning Geek’s view is that the eventual ministerial decision may help illustrate how the August 2026 Green Belt policies are applied to a substantial settlement-edge proposal. The disputed relationship between grey belt, sustainable location, infrastructure and the wider planning balance gives this appeal relevance beyond its housing numbers.
That is an assessment of its potential usefulness. There is currently no decision to treat as authority for allowing or refusing a comparable scheme. Any eventual decision will need to be read with the Inspector’s report and the particular evidence before it.
We will update this article when the Secretary of State’s decision is issued.
Published: 18th September 2026. Recovery confirmed by Shropshire Council; the appeal remains undecided.
0 Comments