Lower Maisonette, 8 Henrietta Street, Bathwick, Bath

8 Henrietta Street forms part of a Grade I late 18th century terrace 6-19 Henrietta Street by Thomas Baldwin, situated within the Bath conservation area and World Heritage Site. It faces onto 20-35 Henrietta Street, which is also Grade I listed and contemporary in design and age, whilst backing onto the gardens of multiple, Grade II listed late 19th century terraced dwellings along Grove Street. As part of an “incomplete, truncated terrace”, it forms part of the unfinished, speculative Georgian development of the Pulteney Estate, and is therefore a significant evidential aspect of the Georgian Town Planning and Georgian Architecture OUV of the World Heritage Site. It possesses strong group value as part of a “monumental ensemble[s]” of interconnecting, grandly articulated terraces.

BPT is supportive of the opportunity to reinstate the natural Bath stone ashlar appearance of the lower ground floor lightwell of 8 Henrietta Street, and commends the inclusion of details such as window sills and window and door reveals as part of the proposed paint removal works. The removal of paint would restore the whole building to its original, designed appearance and would be beneficial when viewed as part of its wider terraced setting, with resulting enhancement to the Grade I terrace’s special architectural and historic interest. The proposed oil-based paint removal would allow for the natural stonework to ‘breathe’ and mitigate further damp issues and associated damage.

We note the potential for issues with the stonework to be uncovered as part of paint removal works and trust that this will be repaired where appropriate and with the necessary consent.

However, the scope of the proposed works remains unclear and somewhat inaccurately depicted from the existing and proposed drawings. The existing plans indicates issues including a missing plinth stone, non-original concrete setts laid over the front lightwell steps, and an area of unspecified damage to the plinth and pavement that may be associated with the damp issues being experienced under the jack arch. It is unclear as to whether these works are proposed to be incorporated into this application, or a future application following the removal of paint and assessment of the stonework’s condition beneath, but their absence from the proposed drawings suggests otherwise? BPT therefore strongly recommends that the methodology of the proposals as part of this listed building application are more clearly outlined.