Red Lion, 468 Wellsway, Bath
The Trust objects to elements of this signage application on the basis that they use low quality materials which do not enhance the listed building. We recognise the need for some illumination as is seen on public houses but will leave the consideration of the appropriateness of trough and LED to the case officer. Sign 1 to the front of the building is inappropriate in terms of materials, the faux timber cladding is an incongruous and low quality addition to a building of this style and the acrylic lettering is unacceptable. A far more appropriate response would be for the lettering to be hand-painted to the façade as is proposed in sign 8; as the building is white the lettering could be green to mirror the signage on the extension building. The hanging sign should be a traditional timber hand-painted sign; it is not clear what materials this is proposed to be from the application. We would prefer not to see any extraneous signage cluttering the elevations such as the stamp (sign 2 and 5) as these detract from the special interest of the listed building, the one to the rear might be acceptable but the side elevation should be kept clear. We would prefer to see a hand painted timber approach for the signs 4a and 4b or at least a high quality printed metal to be used.
In addition we find the proposed pergola to the front garden to be completely unnecessary and unacceptable. Such an incongruous addition will obscure and clutter the front elevation of the listed building and therefore be visually harmful; such harm impacts on the special interest of the building. The pergola would appear to have no purpose beyond wayfinding and therefore harm is not outweighed public benefit.
The proposed elements of signage detailed above would neither preserve nor enhance the special interest of the listed building, the character and appearance of the local area and would detract from the special qualities of the WHS. The scheme would be contrary to Section 16 (Conserving and Enhancing the Historic Environment) of the NPPF, policies B1, B4, and CP6 of the B&NES Core Strategy and policies CP6, D.2, HE1, D.9, B.4, of the Placemaking Plan. We would therefore recommend the application be amended to withdraw this element of the proposals.