A site near Albrighton has failed the previously developed land test even though four cottages once stood there. The Inspector accepted the history, but found that the remains had blended into the landscape.
The land now presented as a domestic garden laid to grass. That meant the proposed one or two homes could not use the relevant brownfield exception to Green Belt policy, and appeal 6010260 was dismissed on 11th September 2026.
The lesson is not that old maps are useless. It is that evidence of past buildings does not give a site permanent brownfield status.
Four former cottages, but a garden today
B Parry sought permission in principle for one or two detached dwellings on land to the east of Old Shackerley Lane, Albrighton. Shropshire Council had refused application 25/04594/PIP.
Inspector C McDonagh considered the location, land use and amount of development. Permission in principle is the first stage of this route; detailed proposals would require a separate technical details consent.
The site is associated with No.5 Shackerley Cottages. Four older cottages had stood on the appeal land, distinct from the four existing cottages nearby which the decision describes as dating from the 1960s.
At the site visit, the appeal land contained grass and ordinary garden features, including a shed, greenhouse and children’s toys. One low brick structure appeared possibly to be a remnant of a former dwelling or outbuilding. The Inspector did not identify a surviving group of ruined cottages.
Why the previously developed land claim failed
The August 2026 NPPF glossary excludes land where former permanent structures or fixed surface structures have “blended into the landscape”. That exclusion matters even where the previous development is accepted.
Here, the Inspector accepted that cottages had existed, supported by the appellant’s historic mapping. However, the physical evidence and the present garden character led to the conclusion that the exclusion applied.
Our previously developed land guide explains the complete definition and its exclusions. A building does not necessarily have to remain intact, but neither does a historic building automatically make the land brownfield forever.
For an applicant, the useful evidence is not just a date on an old map. It is the planning history, the permanent structures and surfaces that remain, and the character of the land being assessed now.
The Green Belt route fell away
The Inspector considered policy GB7(1)(e) the most relevant exception. It concerns redevelopment of previously developed land which would not cause substantial harm to the openness of the Green Belt.
Because the site did not qualify as PDL, that exception could not assist. Other provisions mentioned by the appellant concerned different circumstances, and the decision records that no other applicable exception was argued.
The proposal was therefore inappropriate development. Although its visual effects on openness would be very limited, replacing garden land with houses and hardstanding would reduce spatial openness. The Inspector found a limited overall loss of openness, but gave the resulting Green Belt harm substantial weight.
This was not a separate determination that the land failed the grey-belt definition. The Inspector did not assess a grey-belt case under GB7(1)(g). Failing the PDL route must not be reported as automatically failing every other Green Belt route.
Housing need did not make the location acceptable
Shropshire’s housing land supply figure before the Inspector was 3.81 years. The shortfall was undisputed, and one or two homes would make an important but limited contribution. Construction also attracted limited positive weight.
However, the site was outside the settlements identified in the council’s spatial strategy. Old Shackerley Lane was narrow, unlit and subject to the national speed limit. The Inspector considered future residents highly likely to rely on private vehicles for everyday needs rather than walk or cycle.
The refusal was therefore not just about the PDL label. Green Belt harm and the unsuitable location outweighed the limited benefits. A housing supply shortfall is an important consideration, not an automatic instruction to approve housing anywhere.
A self-build label was not enough
The appellant described the homes as self-build, but no planning obligation was before the Inspector to secure that outcome. The claimed self-build benefit received no weight.
That is a practical evidential point. Where a claimed benefit depends on a particular form of housing being delivered, the decision-maker needs a reliable basis for treating that benefit as part of the scheme.
Avoiding harm was neutral, not a benefit
The absence of harm to heritage assets or nature-conservation sites was treated as neutral in this decision, rather than a positive benefit.
Additional claims about ecology and green credentials also received no weight because the evidence did not establish what would actually be provided. An asserted improvement is different from an evidenced and deliverable benefit.
Planning Geek analysis: compare the Heald Green result
The same-day Heald Green appeal provides a useful contrast. That site was undeveloped, yet the Inspector found it was grey belt after considering its contribution to the relevant Green Belt purposes.
Albrighton had historic cottages but failed the present-day PDL test. Heald Green did not need a history of buildings to qualify as grey belt. These are different policy questions, and neither label should be decided simply by whether land looks green or developed.
Before committing to an application, identify the actual policy route and the evidence needed to support it. Historic development, housing need and a self-build description are not interchangeable answers to that exercise.
Read the decision
Official appeal decision 6010260, issued on 11th September 2026. The key passages are paragraphs 9–13 on PDL, 15–22 on openness and location, and 26–32 on benefits and the planning balance.
Our planning appeals guide explains the wider process.
Report prepared: 13th September 2026
0 Comments