Reordering

The proposed reordering works included: a two floor narthex at the rear of the Church; moving of the screen and suspended rood; moving the font; extending a dais across the nave; disposal of surplus pews; revision of heating and lighting; and levelling of the nave floor. Retrospective approval of a new piano was also sought. There were twelve parties opponent. However, the Chancellor was satisfied that a case had been made for all the items with the exception of moving the suspended rood, and he granted a faculty accordingly. 

The faculty proposed changes to the heating sytem, removal of the side aisle pews and introduction of upholstered chairs to match the chairs in the centre of the nave, which had been authorised in 2015 to replace the nave pews. The Victorian Society objected to more upholstered seating. The Chancellor concluded that, "It would not be reasonable to deny the petitioners more of the same sort of chair", and granted a faculty.

The petition proposed an extensive reordering of the church, to facilitate greater use for the community, including: new kitchen and toilets; a disabled access ramp; a second fire exit; replacing pews with chairs; disposal of the pulpit; moving the font; new heating and lighting; and works to the western gallery. The Chancellor declined to grant a faculty for the removal of the pulpit, on the basis that disposing of the pulpit would constitute serious harm to the interior of the church, but the public benefit, if any, would be small. He also declined to grant a faculty for new lighting in the absence of detailed plans and designs. But he granted a faculty for all the other items, and included a condition (inter alia) that the replacement chairs, to be subject to approval by the Diocesan Advisory Committee, should not be upholstered.

The Chancellor granted a faculty granted for replacement of a oil-fired boiler with gas boilers, notwithstanding that a parishioner had concern that the proposals would cause unnecessary damage to the building.

Petition for re-ordering, including partial removal or shortening of pews; levelling of floor to improve access; installation of accessible WC; installation of “brew facilities”; installation of a glazed screen to create meeting/creche area; installation  of new heating system. Objections by Church Building Council to partial removal of pews and type of heating. Judgment given on the basis of written representations. Faculty granted.

The petition proposed extensive reordering of the church and the creation of a link between the church and the church centre. The controversial item was a proposal to place a curtain wall behind the three arches at the front of the nave and to create within the then enclosed chancel (designed by the well-known church architect George Pace) a meeting room, an office and storage area on three floor levels. The Chancellor considered that the proposal would harm the special character of the building and that the petitioners should consider alternatively ways of finding the meeting, office and storage space they required. The Chancellor therefore granted a faculty which excluded the proposals for the chancel.

The reordering proposals included: removal and disposal of the nave pews, the removal of a balcony structure, the disposal of an electric valve organ, the levelling of the floors by removing the pew platforms, the relocation of the pulpit, the construction of a ramp to the dais, the introduction of a new boiler and underfloor heating system, a new lighting system and a new audio-visual system, the replacement of fibreglass windows with clear glass leaded windows, the provision of a crèche area and a storage area, alterations to the ‘font doors’, new flooring, chairs and tables and complete redecoration. The Victorian Society objected to the removal of the pews and their replacement with upholstered chairs. However, the Deputy Chancellor granted a faculty, being satisfied that the petitioners had made a good case for the proposals and that the resulting public benefit would greatly outweigh any harm caused to the significance of the church as a whole.

The petition proposed an extensive reordering of the Grade II late Victorian church, which would "provide a more flexible space, improved facilities, proper disabled access, proper facilities for families and children, modern heating, modern lighting and a more attractive physical environment to develop the Parish's mission." The Chancellor granted a faculty for the proposed works, with the exception of the proposal to cover all the Victorian tiles in the nave with a wooden floor. The Chancellor stated that he would deal with the issue of the floor by way of an addendum to the judgment, after the parish had had a further opportunity to discuss the matter with the Victorian Society, who had objected to all the tiles being covered.

Faculty granted for £1m re-ordering program of works, including removal of pews, creation of vestry and office in chapel, heating, lighting, drainage and other internal works.

The petition related to the south transept of the Grade I church and the installation of underfloor heating beneath a new stone floor; the provision of a discreet tea point; and the introduction of heritage boards. The historic memorial slabs laid into the floor would be left in situ, covered by the heating elements and the new floor. The Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings entered an objection and became a party opponent. The Chancellor dismissed the petition. He took the view that the proposals were unlikely to achieve what the parish seemed to want, namely, to heat the whole church which is ‘intolerably cold’ for several months of the year. The proposed underfloor heating in the south transept would only provide a partial solution, and one which would be largely compromised due to the inability to isolate the south transept as a sealed environment.