External alterations to the main house. Removal of two circular windows and one door on west elevation to be replaced by one double door with side windows. Metal casement windows…
Our Response

The Trust does not object to the principle of the outline proposals contained in the scheme but we have substantial concerns regarding design and materials and their associated impact on the listed building.

As commented in our last submission, we feel the loss of the round windows to be significant and harmful to the listed building. That said, we understand that there is a balancing judgement to be made in relation to conservation benefits versus harm, and if the conservation officer feels, following a site visit, that the benefits of other elements of the scheme outweigh the harm of the loss of the windows we would accept this.

Our concerns centre on the proposed design of the inserted French doors on both the east and west elevations, they appear to take no reference or cues from the special architectural qualities of the listed building and are incongruous and unsympathetic crittall style multi-pane interventions that are potentially visually harmful to the special architectural interest of the building. It is not clear from the application what colour they are intended to be given the white windows of the rest of the house with their unusual design. In particular we question the need for the courtyard double doors and the associated harm via loss of the circular windows when this is essentially a car parking area. Surely the existing single door would suffice for access from this unprepossessing area?

Similarly the design of the mansard roof form and dormers on 30A appears awkward, especially in the mansard roof’s unresolved relationship to the gable end of the 1880’s extension and the obscuring of the window in this elevation. The roof may need to be hipped to better reveal the window in this gable end. The extent of zinc cladding is also too dominant and detrimental visually in an area where the use of slate is more usual. We would recommend the architect re-thinks these elements of the proposal and in relation to the new doors either; 1.incorporating more simplicity into the door designs to ensure these new elements provide a deferential (rather than assertive) contrast and do not compete with the flamboyant detail of the listed building or 2. Redesigning the doors to replicate the design of double doors seen elsewhere on the building (i.e. to include transom lights, small panes and margin lights).

We note the elevation drawings as proposed do not include the extent of the main building so it is impossible to assess the impact of the proposals on the overall architectural composition; in order for proper assessment of impact to take place contextual elevations should be supplied.

The proposed scheme as it currently stands harms the special interest of the listed building therefore the proposal would be contrary to the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas Act) 1990, Section 16 (Conserving and enhancing the historic environment) of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), policies; B1, B4 and CP6 of the B&NES Core Strategy and policies CP6, D.5, HE1, BD1 of the Placemaking Plan. We would therefore recommend that the application is amended or refused.

Application Number: 18/04240/FUL
Application Date: 21/09/2018
Closing Date: 23/10/2018
Address: 30 Lyncombe Hill, Lyncombe, Bath
Our Submission Status: Object