A Warrington solar appeal has succeeded despite an Inspector finding that a proposed 27.15-megawatt solar farm would be inappropriate development in the Green Belt. On 26th October 2026, Inspector Martin Allen allowed the scheme at Fowl Farm, Cuerdley, between Widnes and Warrington.
The 32-hectare project failed the new grey belt test and would reduce openness, with moderate landscape harm. Nevertheless, the Inspector concluded that the benefits of renewable electricity, biodiversity improvements and a deliverable grid connection amounted to very special circumstances.
I think the Warrington solar appeal deserves attention because it shows that a failed grey belt argument is not necessarily the end of a renewable-energy proposal. The applicant still had to demonstrate a compelling overall planning balance, rather than assume that renewable energy automatically overrides Green Belt policy.
What the Warrington solar appeal concerned
Renewable Connections Developments Ltd challenged Warrington Borough Council’s refusal of application 2025/00961/FULM. The proposal comprises ground-mounted photovoltaic panels with associated access tracks, substations, controls, fencing and security equipment on agricultural fields at Fowl Farm, off Mowcroft Lane. The development is planned for a 40-year operational period.
The Inspector held a hearing on 8th September 2026 and visited the site the following day. He considered amended landscaping drawings that added planting to the west and beside a public right of way to the north. A completed unilateral undertaking secured a contribution for monitoring the habitat management scheme.
This was not a proposal for a battery energy storage system. The Inspector expressly noted that no battery storage element formed part of the development when responding to concerns raised about fire risks. That distinction matters when comparing the case with separate proposals involving batteries or other energy infrastructure.
Why the Green Belt and grey belt arguments failed
The land lies wholly within Warrington’s Green Belt. Under policies GB6 and GB7 of the August 2026 National Planning Policy Framework, the Inspector considered whether the project could qualify for the grey belt exception. The parties agreed that the land did not conflict with the historic-town purpose, so attention centred on checking sprawl and preventing neighbouring towns from merging.
The fields were largely undeveloped, bounded by hedges, trees and a watercourse rather than substantial features capable of containing new development. Although pylons crossed the site and a former power station was nearby, the Inspector found these features did not cancel the land’s wider Green Belt function.
The panels would extend eastwards from the built-up edge of Widnes, creating a projecting form of development. More importantly, the farm occupies a gap between Widnes and Warrington that the Inspector put at approximately 1.6 kilometres wide. The solar installation would extend roughly 800 metres into that gap and reduce the visual separation of the two settlements.
Accordingly, the Warrington solar appeal did not succeed on grey belt grounds. The Inspector said the land did not qualify as grey belt and that the proposal was inappropriate development. He also identified harm to spatial and visual openness. That finding attracted substantial weight even though the panels would be relatively low and temporary.
Landscape harm and high-grade agricultural land
The effects on the local landscape were not dismissed. Users of a public right of way crossing the site would walk through a corridor between solar arrays. Views would be altered, with new planting eventually screening some parts of the installation but also channelling views along the path.
The Inspector also identified moderate harm from South Lane, with lesser effects from Mowcroft Lane and a neighbouring woodland park. He concluded that the development would cause moderate overall harm to the area’s character and appearance, contrary to the landscape protection aims of the adopted local plan. Our guidance on landscape and visual impact assessment explains the evidence normally used to test such effects.
Around 15 hectares of the 32-hectare site was grade 3a land, classed as best and most versatile agricultural land. The Inspector recognised its quality but also its irregular distribution across the site. He accepted that the solar installation was reversible, the land could be returned to agriculture, and livestock grazing could continue during operation.
For the Warrington solar appeal, that distinction prevented the agricultural land issue becoming an independent reason to refuse. It did not mean that best and most versatile land can always be used for solar farms without consequence. The temporary nature, reversibility and continued agricultural activity were all important facts.
Renewable energy and biodiversity tipped the balance
The principal benefit was electricity production. The appellant estimated that the solar farm could supply the equivalent of approximately 10,660 homes and avoid 4,930 tonnes of carbon dioxide annually. These were the applicant’s projections recorded by the Inspector, not independently guaranteed output figures.
Warrington Council accepted that the proposal would make “a sizeable contribution to the delivery of renewable energy”. The Inspector referred to the national emphasis on energy security and clean power, including policy W3, which directs substantial weight to relevant infrastructure benefits.
Grid availability helped make those benefits credible. The appellant reported a Gate 2 offer from the National Energy System Operator and said connection could be possible before 2035, potentially before 2030. The Inspector treated that as supporting deliverability rather than an unconditional promise of a particular energisation date.
The biodiversity evidence also weighed in favour. The submitted assessment projected a 169% increase in habitat units, a 14% increase in hedgerow units and a 16% increase in watercourse units, figures substantially exceeding the statutory 10% biodiversity net gain requirement for relevant development. Our guide to biodiversity net gain explains why these metrics and the subsequent approved management arrangements matter.
The Warrington solar appeal was therefore allowed through the very special circumstances route, not because solar farms are automatically exempt from Green Belt restrictions. The Inspector weighed the substantial Green Belt harm and moderate landscape harm against the scheme’s renewable energy benefits and other material considerations, finding that the favourable considerations clearly outweighed the harm.
Conditions and lessons for future solar schemes
Planning permission comes with an extensive schedule of conditions. The consent is limited to 40 years after first electricity export, with advance details of decommissioning and restoration required. The Inspector also required management arrangements for construction, drainage, landscaping, archaeology, badgers, lighting, habitat enhancement and ongoing grazing.
A permissive path is to be provided and retained, with a minimum two-metre width and a compacted surface. Separately, the statutory biodiversity gain plan must be approved before development begins. The Inspector declined unnecessary additional conditions where existing statutory controls or the approved scheme already dealt with the point.
What should promoters take from the Warrington solar appeal? First, test each Green Belt purpose against the actual geography, especially where a site lies between settlements. Secondly, distinguish landscape effects visible to the public from the separate legal harm arising from inappropriate Green Belt development. Thirdly, present credible grid, agricultural, biodiversity and lifetime-restoration evidence rather than relying on generic climate-benefit assertions.
This is a fact-specific Planning Inspectorate appeal decision, not a court judgment or a general permission for solar development in the Green Belt. Applicants facing a similar refusal still need to show why their particular scheme crosses the very special circumstances threshold.
Appeal decision and sources
Inspector Martin Allen allowed appeal 6008814 on 26th October 2026 following the September hearing and site visit. The applicant was Renewable Connections Developments Ltd and the relevant Warrington Borough Council application was 2025/00961/FULM. Read the official Planning Inspectorate appeal record. The appeal decision is also available on AppealBase. The short quotation attributed to the Council is reproduced from the Inspector’s published decision under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
0 Comments