Reordering

The petitioners sought permission to remove four pews from the back of the church, in order to provide more room for the serving of refreshments and for accommodating buggies and wheelchairs. The church is Victorian and unlisted. There was one objector, who did not become a party opponent. The Chancellor, being satisfied that the works were both needed and appropriate, granted a faculty.

The former vicar and wardens wished to dispose of three of the four oak choir stalls and clergy seats removed pursuant to a Faculty granted on 29th September 2004 and to place the fourth stall in the lower vestry. The Chancellor granted a faculty.

The petitioners wished to remove the Victorian pews from a Grade II* listed church and replace them with wooden upholstered chairs. The Victorian Society and Historic England both accepted that the pews were of no particular merit, but objected to them being replaced with upholstered chairs, though they did not wish to be parties opponent. The Chancellor granted a faculty for the removal of the pews, on condition that the replacement chairs should be unupholstered and of a design to be agreed between the petitioners and the Diocesan Advisory Committee, and in default of such agreement to be decided by the Court.

In 2016 the Chancellor had granted a faculty for reordering works including the replacement of the pews with chairs. He had declined to approve upholstered chairs, but approved the introduction of unupholstered chairs. The petitioners now sought, after much research and consultation, an amendment of the 2016 faculty to authorise a different type of upholstered chair with upholstered seats and upholstered back pads within a wooden frame. The Chancellor concluded that "as the chairs are to have wooden frames and those frames are to have a dark stain applied to them, the additional visual impact of upholstered back pad, though real, will be modest. That additional impact is outweighed by the benefits to be obtained and by the fact that such chairs are the clear preference of the worshipping community after what I accept has been careful consideration of the alternatives." He therefore directed that the faculty granted in 2016 be amended accordingly.

The petitioners wished to remove permanently from the 1960s church the original pulpit, which  had not been used for 20 years. Three individuals objected to the proposal, but the Chancellor determined that the pulpit 'does little, if anything, for the look of the interior, and it is not an item of intrinsic worth or merit.' He accordingly granted a faculty.

The proposals were to install two matching etched-glass memorial screens and doors in the north and south archways at the east end of the nave, and also install a new projector and a 'smart' glass projector screen, which would be transparent when not in use, and opaque when used with the projector. The Victorian Society objected to the proposed projector screen. The Chancellor granted a faculty, being satisfied that the proposals would not cause more than minimal harm to the significance of this church as a building of special architectural or historic interest.

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.

The proposal was to remove one pew and rearrange three pews at the western end of the church on the south side so as to form an enclosed space with pews on three sides, in order to provide more circulation space for people gathering for coffee after a service; a safe place for children during services; a space for notices and worship aids; and an area for small meetings. There were several letters of objection from people who were resident in the parish or on the electoral roll, but there were no formal parties opponent. The Chancellor granted a faculty, being satisfied that the removal of the pews would not result in harm to the significance of the Grade II listed church as a building of special architectural or historic interest, and that the Petitioners had shown a sufficiently good reason for the change.

The petitioners wished to replace all the nave pews with chairs, level the floor and install underfloor heating and carpet the nave. The Chancellor granted a faculty.

The proposals were to replace the pews with metal-framed, upholstered chairs; removal of the clergy stalls; and alterations to floor levels and the heating installation. The Victorian Society indicated that it would not oppose the removal of the pews if appropriate wooden, unupholstered chairs were to be provided by way of replacement. A private objector objected to the removal of the clergy stalls and the pews. The Deputy Commissary General dismissed the petition. He determined that the removal of all of the Victorian pews would adversely affect the character of the Victorian church. He also did not consider that the replacement steel-framed, upholstered chairs would be likely to be an appropriate replacement for the pews in this particular church, if the pews were to be removed.