34 Lyncombe Hill, Lyncombe, Bath
34 Lyncombe Hill forms part of a Grade II early 19th century residential terrace situated within the Bath conservation area and World Heritage Site. The terrace sits on the western slope above Lyncombe Hill with views across the valley to the Widcombe area. It is situated below the eastern boundary of Alexandra Park and therefore has some limited public visibility of the terrace’s rear elevation.
Dormers of a contemporary design are present at 36 Lyncombe Hill. However, these were consented in 1969 prior to the terrace’s listing in 1972. In prominent views, particularly of the principal elevation, the dormer scale and design is at odds with the fine sash window fenestration across the terrace and the typical two-over-two sash dormer window design present at 32, 40, and 42 Lyncombe Hill, and therefore should not be considered an appropriate design precedent.
We have some concerns regarding the use of an overtly contemporary dormer design where the terrace remains largely traditional in its use of fenestrated dormers, even in 21st century examples (see 44 Lyncombe Hill consent 01/01031/LBA). We maintain that part of the terrace’s special architectural interest is in its homogeneity of appearance and balanced layout. Whilst Bath’s backland character can offer opportunities for more diverse architectural additions, Lyncombe Hill’s west elevation, whilst less formal, retains its aesthetic uniformity. We therefore recommend that a more traditional dormer design is selected better accord with appearance of a Grade II terrace rather than further unbalancing its uniformity with detriment to its special architectural or historic interest.
Furthermore, the roof plan appears to indicate that both the proposed dormer and rooflight would wrap around the north and south chimney stacks, although this is not further elaborated in either the D&A Statement or Heritage Statement. The chimney stacks are identified to be of high significance within the Heritage Statement. We therefore suggest further information is included, particularly as to how the dormer would interact with the chimney stack and whether this necessitates any form of material attachment. We suggest that the dormer could be moved slightly to the north to avoid ‘crashing’ into the side of the chimney stack and avoid any potential material conflicts with a feature of historic interest.