A very nice shot in what looks like tricky lighting.
Back tilt is often used by landscape photographers to exaggerate the conventional Big Rock in the foreground, but it does this by tinkering with the geometry of the scene.
In this case, rear tilt would have given the same geometric effect as pointing the camera upwards and the towers, together with the windows on the right, would have tapered upwards. If the verticals in the picture are to remain vertical, the back must be vertical too.
In this case, Joanna has wanted to keep the hanging lamp on its delicate bracket sharp, but retain some sharpness in the towers. Simply focusing on the lamp would have left the background unsharp. She's done an excellent job and presumably stopped down a good deal, because the windows on the right-hand wall seem reasonably sharp too. Rear swing might have done a similar job, but in that case the relative sizes of the two walls would have been altered. (In he same way that the foreground rock is exaggerated.) I assume that using front swing was an aesthetic choice, although some cameras don't have rear swing. (Even some Ebony cameras.)
To visualise alternative renderings, we can suppose that the right hand wall was important. For example, a famous person may have lived there. In that case, the image could have been a little different. There's not enough space to erect a tripod directly opposite the wall for a flat view, but a cunning use of rear swing could have changed its relative size. I'm sure that Joanna knows more about this sort of thing than I do.
It's a situation that Atget faced when making his records of Old Paris in very narrow streets.
In this image, if an exaggerated foreground was really needed, perhaps because there was significant detail, (a reflection in a puddle?) on the road, the only solution would be to use a wider lens, but that would drastically alter the whole image and the towers would appear much smaller. Dropping the front to show more foreground would cut off the top of the towers. It would be an entirely different picture.
If I may ramble a bit more, Joanna's story illustrates one of the constant dilemmas of LF photography. She has taken an excellent, perfectly focused and exposed image, but she could have settled for a slightly less perfect image with the all-too-transient delight of the 2CV.
Much the same situation arises with shafts of sunlight, or approaching storms, or incoming tides. I've watched videos of LF photographers in (I think) Yosemite, obliged to take their shot when the scene became momentarily free from the swarm of rucksack-ed couples tottering between the photogenic rocks. The usual solution is to hike there in darkness and set up before dawn, but the sun isn't always in the right place at dawn.