Striped painted façade at 95 High Street, Marlborough

What was proposed

The application sought to retain burgundy and pink striped paint on the building’s front façade.

“Proposal Retention of burgundy and pink striped painted front façade.”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The site is a grade II listed eighteenth-century building in the Marlborough Conservation Area, forming part of a group of listed High Street buildings.

“The building is located at the western end of the High Street and is the end building of a short row of grade II listed buildings (with the exception of No.92, which is a non-designated heritage asset), which contains the library at No.90. There is a high density of listed buildings in this part of the Conservation Area, which house a variety of uses from residential to commercial.”

“No. 95 itself is an 18 th century timber framed building with brick elevations, consisting of two- storeys under an old plain clay tiled roof. It is a fine example of the local vernacular architecture; an older building, it has a more cottage character, and this part of the conservation area is much more residential in character around the church and former school (now the library).”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended refusal because the stripes were not traditional, distracted from architectural detailing, and harmed the listed building and conservation area.

“However, the addition of the coloured stripes is not a traditional form of elevational decoration either locally or nationally, and the form in which they take detract from the building’s strong visual qualities. Dentil detailing at eaves level is obscured by the visually distracting alternating coloured stripes, losing sight of the simple Classical detailing at high level.”

“Conclusion The recommendation is to refuse listed building consent, as the painting of the front elevation fails to preserve its special interest as a grade II listed building and its setting within the Marlborough Conservation Area, by virtue of the lack of a traditional form of surface decoration for a listed building or local tradition within the area.”

Officer report

Consultation and public comments

The town council raised no objection subject to suitable paint, the paint was confirmed breathable, and three third-party comments supported the decoration.

“Summary of representations • Marlborough Town Council: At the Planning Committee meeting held 30 th March 2026 it was RESOLVED: that Marlborough Town Council has no objection to this…”

“Officer comment – the applicant was approached to provide further details on the type of paint used. It was confirmed that: ‘the paint used for the redecoration is Johnstone’s Trade Stormshield Sol Silicate Masonry paint. This is a mineral-based, non-film forming coating designed for use on lime render and similar traditional surfaces.”

Officer report

Who spoke

A councillor read a statement supporting the application, and the local unitary member spoke about paint finishes, trade, physical harm and precedent.

What members debated

Members discussed physical and visual harm, breathable paint, support for high streets, policy protection, precedent and the building’s historic character.

“Members of the Committee had the opportunity to ask technical questions regarding the application. Details were sought on the harm being created with i t clarified that though no physical harm had been created through the use of appropriate paint, the paint scheme broke up and distorted the visual detailing of the original architecture.”

“During the debate, issues were raised such as the importance of adhering to building regulations, how in a climate where high streets were struggling it would be positive to support retailers and increase footfall, reference was also made to how the paint used had been breathable.”

Minutes

The committee’s decision

The committee refused listed building consent because the stripes caused visual harm without sufficient justification or public benefits, and referred the case to enforcement.

“The proposal causes harm to its significance as a designated heritage asset. In addition, the proposal also causes visual harm to the character and appearance of the Marlborough Conservation Area.”

“The case should be referred to the Enforcement Team to seek the removal of the stripes, issuing a formal notice should an initial written request to paint out the stripes with an agreed colour scheme (or to return the elevation to the solid colour it was previously) not be adhered to.”

Minutes