# 9 Green Lane, Formby

- **Decision:** dismissed, 7 September 2026
- **Decided by:** Planning Inspector: R Gravett
- **Authority:** Sefton (North West)
- **Appeal reference:** 6008359
- **Application reference:** DC/2025/00544
- **Procedure:** written-representations
- **Development:** Retrospective solid powder-coated steel doors and shopfront signage on unit in the Art Deco Embassy Building
- **Site context:** inside-settlement, conservation-area
- **Green Belt:** no
- **Framework applied:** August 2026 NPPF
- **Determinative policies:** HE6, HE7, DP3, S4(1)
- **Development plan policies:** A Local Plan for Sefton 2017 NH12, NH15, EQ2, Formby and Little Altcar Neighbourhood Plan WS6, ESD2
- **Main issues:** host building, conservation area
- **Tags:** tier-2, s4-within-settlement, s4-substantially-outweighed, heritage-harm-decisive, conservation-area, non-designated-heritage-asset, retrospective, parties-consulted-on-2026-framework

## Summary
Retrospective solid steel doors and a flat shopfront on the Art Deco "Embassy Building" in the Green Lane Conservation Area, Formby, were dismissed. The inspector identified the building as an NDHA and found harm to it and to the CA. TC2 gave substantial weight to local-centre vitality. That benefit was "substantially outweighed" by DP3, HE6 and HE7 conflict under S4 (DL ¶25-26).

## What made the difference
Loss of the glazed, articulated ground floor that had characterised the parade since the 1930s. There was no evidence of the security problems said to justify steel doors (DL ¶17). The council also raised DM8, the new policy on intentional unauthorised development. It was set aside because intent was not shown (DL ¶21).

## Policy findings
- **HE6: harm (substantial weight).** solid unarticulated shopfront harms Green Lane CA; security benefits unevidenced (DL 11-18)
- **HE7: harm.** harm to Embassy Building identified as an NDHA in decision-making (DL 5-7, 15, 18)
- **S4(1): fail.** TC2 substantial weight to local-centre vitality substantially outweighed by DP3, HE6 and HE7 conflict (DL 24-26)

## Key facts
- NDHA status identified during decision-making under PPG (DL 5-7)
- DM8 (intentional unauthorised development) given no bearing, as intent not shown (DL 21)

## Sources
- https://appeal-planning-decision.service.gov.uk/comment-planning-appeal/appeals/6008359
- https://appeal-planning-decision.service.gov.uk/published-document/5c6baf91-0f93-4a83-af42-90e715b57933

---

Source: https://planningdistilled.org/research/england/nppf-navigator/decisions/PINS-6008359.html

A summary of a public planning decision, written from the decision letter. Not legal advice. © Planning Distilled. Released under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/): share and adapt freely, with credit to Planning Distilled. Quotations from decision letters, plans and the Framework remain the copyright of their publishers.