The Northern Planning Committee of Shropshire Council met on Tuesday 21 April 2026 to consider several planning applications, including proposals for a new hotel, residential developments, and an expansion of a poultry unit. The committee also received an update on recent appeal decisions.

Proposed Hotel East of The Shrewsbury Club, Sundorne Road, Shrewsbury (24/03877/OUT)

An outline application was scheduled for discussion regarding the construction of a hotel with associated parking and landscaping east of The Shrewsbury Club. The proposal sought to establish the principle of development, with access and layout to be considered, while appearance, scale, and landscaping would be reserved for subsequent approval. The report pack indicated that officers recommended granting planning permission, subject to a Section 106 agreement and specified conditions. This recommendation was made despite objections from Shrewsbury Town Council, which raised concerns about consistency with the Big Town Plan Vision and the Shrewsbury Movement Strategy, as well as environmental and heritage issues. Public comments also highlighted concerns regarding highway capacity, traffic, safety, parking, residential amenity, landscape, trees, biodiversity, sustainability, and the accuracy of submission documents.

Land To The East Of Merrington Road, Bomere Heath, Shrewsbury (25/02929/OUT)

The committee was scheduled to consider an outline planning application for up to 98 dwellings on land east of Merrington Road, Bomere Heath. Access was to be considered, with all other matters reserved. The recommendation was to grant permission, subject to conditions and a Section 106 agreement to secure affordable housing, open space management, and biodiversity net gain monitoring. Bomere Heath Parish Council objected, citing concerns about over-development, strain on existing infrastructure such as schools and GP practices, drainage pressures, highway safety, and the loss of local amenity. Numerous public objections echoed these concerns, along with issues regarding the settlement boundary, sustainability, and the potential for increased flood risk. Shropshire Council's Highways Development Control raised no objection, subject to conditions, and the Affordable Housing team confirmed a need for more affordable homes.

Foxholes Farm Poultry Unit, Little Ness, Shrewsbury (24/02979/EIA)

The committee was to discuss an application for the erection of two additional poultry houses, associated feed bins, hardstandings, and a relocated access road at Foxholes Farm Poultry Unit. This was linked to a proposed reduction in stocking density across the whole farm to higher welfare standards. The recommendation was to grant planning permission, subject to conditions and a Section 106 agreement for HGV routing control and long-term biodiversity net gain. Little Ness Parish Council supported the application, citing fewer poultry, higher welfare standards, and no additional traffic impact. The Environment Agency raised no objection, noting that manure would be managed via the adjacent Anaerobic Digester (AD) plant. SC Ecology also raised no objection, subject to conditions, and confirmed that the proposal would not adversely affect designated ecological sites. However, ESP, a landscape consultant, raised concerns about the Landscape and Visual Assessment, recommending amendments. A single public objection raised concerns about the accuracy of bird numbers, cumulative impacts, the disposal of digestate, air pollution, and the higher welfare claims.

Proposed Residential Development Land on the West side of Ellesmere Road, Shrewsbury (22/01432/OUT)

An outline application for up to 450 dwellings and strategic infrastructure on land west of Ellesmere Road was scheduled for consideration. This application had been deferred at a previous meeting to seek further assurances on highway network impacts and active travel routes. An addendum report detailed further discussions with the applicant and the Local Highways Authority, who confirmed satisfaction with the provided information regarding highway impacts, including on Chester Street and Castle Foregate, and active travel provisions. The recommendation remained to grant planning permission, subject to a Section 106 agreement and conditions. Shrewsbury Town Council and various public objectors had raised concerns about increased traffic, insufficient local infrastructure, inadequate travel plans, carbon neutrality, safety of access roads, ecological impacts on the Old River Bed SSSI, and the proportion of affordable housing. Supporters highlighted the need for housing, efficient land use, and potential transport improvements.

Appeals and Appeal Decisions

The committee was to be updated on recent appeal decisions. These included:

• Appeal Ref: 6002055 - To the West of Dovaston, Shropshire (25/02169/OUT): Dismissed for being contrary to development plan policies regarding location and the lack of a clear mechanism to secure it as a self-build dwelling.
• Appeal Ref: 6001947 - 3 Loxdale, Shrewsbury (25/03153/OUT): Allowed, granting outline planning permission for two dwellings, finding no harm to the character and appearance of the locality and that benefits outweighed adverse impacts.
• Appeal Ref: 6003194 - Hengoed Fields, Upper Hengoed, Oswestry (25/03156/FUL): Allowed, granting permission for a residential caravan site for two Gypsy/Traveller families, balancing harm to the rural landscape against the need for Gypsy and Traveller pitches.
• Appeal Ref: 6002050 - Land north of 13 Ash Magna (25/01379/FUL): Dismissed due to harm to the character and appearance of the area and insufficient outside space for future occupiers.
• Appeal Ref: 6001946 - Knolls Croft, Montford Bridge (25/01826/CPL & 25/01827/CPL): Allowed for side extensions, but dismissed for rear extensions, based on the interpretation of principal elevation and permitted development rights.
• Appeal Ref: 6002055 - Land north of B5067 and adjoining crossroads, Walford Heath (25/03186/PIP): Allowed, granting permission in principle for four to five dwellings, finding the location acceptable despite conflicts with development plan policies, due to the presumption in favour of sustainable development.

The committee was also to be informed of other appeals lodged and appeal decisions made.