Reordering

A major reordering of the Grade I church was proposed. Much of the work related to adjusting floor levels, improving access and installing underfloor heating. Notwithstanding concerns expressed by the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings, the Church Buildings Council and Historic England, the Chancellor granted a faculty, being satisfied that the public benefit of greater accessibility would assist the church as a local centre of worship and mission.

The petitioners wished to introduce two pods with curved wooden screens connected by a curved step to form a continuous arc across the west end of the church which would accommodate toilet and kitchen facilities. The statutory consultees did not consider it appropriate for the proposed new structures to be curved. The Victorian Society became a party opponent. The Chancellor decided to grant a faculty, for two reasons: (1) he was of the opinion that 'a curved design would be less visually intrusive, and would cause less harm to the significance of this church building, than a rectilinear design'; and (2) whilst both sides could not agree on a matter of aesthetics, and particularly where the Diocesan Advisory Committee has not objected to the proposals, 'I consider that considerable, if not decisive weight, should be accorded to the views of the PCC, as the democratically elected body entrusted with the task of making decisions for the parish.'

The following works of reordering were proposed: disposal of unwanted furniture; installation of an aumbry, with a lamp; and installation of a nave altar. There was one objector (who did not become a party opponent), whose main objection was to the introduction of the aumbry. The Chancellor determined that the objector's arguments on procedural or doctrinal grounds were wrong and he therefore granted a faculty.

The rector and churchwardens wished to remove to the diocesan furnishing store or to dispose of by sale the ebonised wooden altar cross (date of installation unknown) on the dossal shelf of the reredos, as the cross partly obscured the Agnus Dei design of the reredos by George Gilbert Scott. Letters of objection were received from several parishioners. The Chancellor was satisfied that the petitioners had made out a case for their proposal, and he accordingly granted a faculty.

The incumbent and churchwardens applied for a faculty to authorise works which included the removal and storage of one pair of wooden doors; the reduction in size of the disabled lavatory cubicle, so as to provide more space in the adjacent room which is used as a creche; the introduction of worktops; associated electrical and drainage works; and relocation of a Belfast sink to the north porch. There were 16 letters of objection, but no parties opponent. The Chancellor was satisfied that, although the guidelines set out in the judgment in Re St. Alkmund Duffield [2013] did not engage in the case of this unlisted Victorian church, the petitioners had made out a good case for the proposed works, and he granted a faculty.

The church is situated in an area which floods regularly. In 2014, severe flooding had damaged the wood block flooring of the Grade I listed church. It was proposed to replace the wood block flooring with stone laid over insulation and with underfloor heating. The architects on the Diocesan Advisory Committee did not favour the type of insulation ("Celotex") proposed by the church architect. After considering the advice of the architects and advice from a Chartered Civil Engineer, the Chancellor granted a faculty for the works as proposed by the church architect.

The petitioners wished to install two closed circuit television ("CCTV") cameras in the church and a recorder in the vestry, to enable the church to be left open during the day. The Commissary General granted a faculty (subject to conditions) and set out in her judgment the principles and guidelines to be followed in respect of future applications for the installation of CCTV equipment.

The petition proposed the removal and disposal of three pews from the back of the church, replacing them with moveable tables and chairs; removal and disposal of the wooden pulpit; and moving the stone font from the back to the front of the church. The church building dates from 1907. It was formerly a church hall. The Deputy Chancellor granted a faculty. 

The Chancellor granted a faculty for (a) the removal of six rows of pews and (b) new flooring, as Phase 1 of proposals to create some consistency in floor levels and provide more circulation space at the west end of the church.

The proposal was for an extension to the church. The Diocesan Advisory Committee and the Church Buildings Council had reservations about the use of space for the various facilities proposed for the extension. The Chancellor was satisfied that the proposed arrangement of the facilities in the extension offered an appropriate solution to meeting the needs of the parish.