OXFORD DIOCESAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR THE CARE OF ... · Page 1 of 20 OXFORD DIOCESAN ADVISORY...

of 20

OXFORD DIOCESAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR THE CARE OF CHURCHES MINUTES of the meeting of the Committee held in the McKenna Room at Christ Church, Oxford on 11th March 2019. PRESENT: Revd D Witchell (Acting Chairman), Archdeacon of Dorchester, Archdeacon of Buckingham, Archdeacon of Oxford, Mr D Clark, Revd Canon J West, Mrs H Ensor, Prof J Missenden, Revd Dr A Doig, Revd S Pullin, Revd Canon Dr P Groves, Ven C Allsopp. DAC Staff: Mrs L Kitch, Mrs S Hammond, Ms J Schillig, Mr D Mason APOLOGIES:

Ms G O’Farrell-Wallum, Mr H Gibbon, Archdeacon of Berkshire, Mr B Martin, Mrs J Christie, Revd V Plumb, Mr Julian Munby.

1. Minutes of the meetings held on 14th January 2019 were approved.

2. Declarations of interest

Brasenose College Chapel – Revd Canon Dr P Groves

3. Correspondence, policy and other matters for consideration

The Committee noted the appointment of two new DAC advisors, Mr Giles Pritchard

and Ms Sarah Brown, by Bishop’s Council December 2018.

Review of DAC Committee changes

After the first year of operating with only 6 DAC meetings a year and considering

‘minor’ faculties online we have discussed as a team, and with the Diocesan Registry

what impacts this working system has had. The DAC Committee were also invited to

provide feedback on the new system.

The DAC team felt that the changes had successfully improved workflow, response

times for parishes, and awareness of the details of the larger schemes which may

have previously been missed due to time pressure for review. The loss of the built in

delay in progressing a case between submission and consideration by the DAC

committee has evened out the peaks and troughs in the DAC team’s workload,

making this more of a constant flow. Whilst this can make it hard to carve out time to

of 20

attend to non casework related tasks it does mean that there is less possibility of

catastrophe if a team member were to be unexpectedly away during a peak time.

The Diocesan Registry clerk reports being able to better manage workload as the

Notifications of Advice are received continuously instead of once a month.

Parishes submitting minor schemes for faculty permission received their NOAs

considerably faster as they no longer had to be taken to a DAC meeting, although of

course this is controlled by the response times of the sub committee members.

Parishes proposing larger schemes of alteration have returned to committee fewer

number of times and all aspects of each scheme have been identified and discussed.

The bi monthly meetings do not cause a delay for these larger schemes as under the

old system DAC officers would often still be issuing feedback on the cases by the time

the next agenda had closed, leaving parishes no time to make any amendments for

that following meeting.

Discussing only major schemes at the DAC Committee meeting has led to more

focused review and shorter meetings. In 2017 agendas averaged 47 cases and

meetings often went on until 1pm. We now usually finish in the 2 hour time slot and

see around 20 cases per agenda.

The reduction in the number of meetings has led to a reduction in time to administer

these, which is quite substantial and we have been able to become more deeply

involved with parishes on major schemes. I am convinced that had we been operating

the previous system during this time of reduced staffing it would have been

extremely difficult to keep on track.

We are very aware that this system is only successful because the DAC members and

advisors are generous with their time and expertise and happy to review proposals

outside of the DAC meetings. We are currently recruiting more advisors to ensure all

areas of expertise are covered and that there are more people available to review

proposals.

The agenda is usually issued 10 days ahead of the meeting, giving members sufficient

time to read the case documentation, and as feedback letters are drafted prior to the

meeting and attached in draft to these papers the DAC officer usually only has to

make small alterations to the feedback and parishes receive this much earlier than

they used to. In addition, schemes are coming to the DAC committee with sufficient

detail for the DAC to make a resolution, which was not always the case previously due

to DAC officers not having sufficient time to review and comment on the application

for a parish to revise ahead of DAC consideration.

Although DAC members and advisors are selected by the DAC officer for the review of

each scheme all papers are available to all members and advisors on the Online

Faculty System, and a link is provided to each case in the agenda so that all members

of 20

may review any papers should they wish. The timing of meetings has also ensured

that every scheme discussed at the committee has been visited by members at least

once. This review of documentation and visting site has led to the DAC members

being more confident in discussing schemes and making resolutions which are well

informed.

Only one member of the DAC committee sent feedback on the changes and

requested that where a delegation site visit is to be held for a major scheme that all

members of the committee are notified so that they may attend should they wish.

We have found in the past that if a blank invitation is sent to all a DAC officer can find

themselves on site with no members, or that the attending cross section of members

may not represent all the specialisms needed for that scheme. On the other hand if

lots of DAC members attend this can appear heavy handed to the parish. I suggest

that we continue to invite specific members for site visits and that should anyone

wish to be invited to all (thank you!) that they let me know so that we can ensure that

they receive an invitation.

As a result of these changes review of all applications has become faster and more

rigorous and the service provided to parishes has improved. We are therefore going

to continue operating in this way but will review systematically to ensure the DAC

processes always keep up with the changing faculty system and parish needs.

The Committee resolved to continue with the new working arrangements and to review

this annually.

Miscellaneous Provisions Measure – delegation of authority to DAC officers

A new power came into force on 1 March 2019 that has the potential to make a significant contribution to the work of DACs and enable more effective use of DAC time and swifter responses to churches. The Church of England (Miscellaneous Provision) Measure 2018 provides new powers for Diocesan Advisory Committees to delegate matters to its officers.

The wording of the new provision is ‘The committee may delegate the exercise of any of its functions to an officer of the committee.’ To assist DACs in the discussion of how to use this power the CBC has published a guidance note available here. This change in the law makes it possible for DAC officers to review applications and issue a Notification of Advice without the need to consult DAC members or advisors. In Oxford diocese it is proposed that this delegated authority be used in the case of ‘minor’ faculties, which are currently dealt with by subcommittee. Where the DAC

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukcm/2018/7/section/12/enacted

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukcm/2018/7/section/12/enacted

https://www.churchofengland.org/sites/default/files/2019-01/ccb-dac-delegated-advice.pdf

https://www.churchofengland.org/sites/default/files/2019-01/ccb-dac-delegated-advice.pdf

of 20

officer is content with the proposal for a minor faculty then they will be able to issue the Notification of Advice, without the need to consult a members of or advisors to the committee. Where the review of the application requires more technical expertise then the DAC officer will continue to seek the views of a sub committee. Examples of the types of cases in which delegated authority might be utilised are the installation of a new noticeboard and the erection of a shed in the churchyard. The cases which were reviewed by delegated authority will be noted in the agenda of the next DAC meeting. This would bring DAC officers closer in line with Historic England inspectors or Church Buildings Council officers. The criteria for a ‘major’ faculty case, which must be considered by the full committee, and to which delegated authority is not applicable, is as below:

Alterations (structural or liturgical) which affect the character of the building, whether it is listed or not.

Works involving extensive restoration, conservation, relocation, introduction or disposal of significant instruments (including bells), fittings, fixtures, paintings, treasures or monuments.

Works which require consultation with the Church Buildings Council under rule 9.6 of the FJ Rules 2015 (in both listed or unlisted churches) when proposals will have a significant impact (resulting in a lasting change to a church building, its interior or setting) to a grade I or grade II* listed church. 9.6.—(1) This rule applies where proposals contained in a petition for a faculty or in an application for an injunction or a restoration order involve— (a) the introduction, conservation, alteration or disposal of an article of special historic, architectural, archaeological or artistic interest; (b) the alteration, extension or re-ordering of a church in a way that is likely significantly to affect the setting of an article of special historic, architectural, archaeological or artistic interest; or (c) the movement or removal of an article of special historic, architectural, archaeological or artistic interest such that the article might be adversely affected unless special precautions are taken.

Of course, should a parish not be content to accept the advice of the DAC officer, or the Senior Church Buildings Officer, then the scheme could be referred to a sub committee of members and advisors or the full committee. The Oxford DAC officers are exceptionally well qualified and experienced to use this delegated authority with respect and to identify where the details of a scheme are beyond their professional expertise, referring these schemes to a DAC advisor or member as approporiate. When appointing any new DAC case officers in the future the Senior Church Buildings Officer and Director of Glebe and Buildings will be seeking individuals with similar buildings and conservation expertise as the existing team. It is proposed that team members who are yet to pass their probation period will not be able to use this delegated authority. The Senior Church Buildings Officer will review all

of 20

cases where delegated authority has been utilised, prior to NOA issued, for the first 3 months. It is of note that the DAC does not currently have any budget for Continual Professional Development and should the DAC resolve to support this proposal it may be appropriate to seek to address this in order to ensure that the DAC officers are kept up to date with changing legislation, conservation theory, and practice.

When a new faculty application is made a DAC case officer is assigned to the application and reviews all the documentation in the submission. At present the arranging of these documents into a sensible format, emailing to a sub committee member, possibly chasing for a response, and subsequent issuing of paperwork can take a period of several weeks or even months, especially where further information is required from a parish. Were a DAC officer able to issue the NOA when content that the scheme was appropriate this could all be done in a matter of hours. Delegated authority will also reduce the workload of the DAC members and advisors, who are regularly consulted on schemes in which common sense, or the expertise of the DAC officer, would have been sufficient. The use of delegated authority would also make the system easier to understand for parishes, who can discuss the scheme directly with the individual reviewing the documentation and whom they often have contacted before.

As the first DAC to hold a committee meeting since the new legislation was enacted

we do not know how others will respond. The proposal in Oxford is that the minor

faculty cases, which currently require an email subcommittee, are delegated to DAC

officers. The DAC officer will obtain the advice of any member or advisor to the DAC

that they feel appropriate for the particular instance. The DAC officers, overseen by

the Senior Church Buildings Officer and the Director of Glebe and Buildings, to act

within their professional capabilities and to ensure that wherever the advice of an

expert member or advisor is required it is obtained. A note of all NOAs issued under

delegated authority are to be reported to the next DAC meeting for information.

This will enable cases which are minor and which do not impact the character of the

building to be processed far more quickly than at present as there will be no need to

manipulate documents for referral, to await responses and chase any non responses.

This legislative change was brought forward by the Oxford Diocese Chancellor after

discussion with Liz Kitch.

The Committee resolved to delegate consideration of minor faculty matters to its

officers on the terms set out above, noting that the Director of Glebe and Buildings is to

ensure that DAC staff are supported with CPD.

of 20

Bradfield St Andrews Bishops Directions

The Committee resolved to delegate the detailed consideration of the proposals

within the Bishop’s Directions to David Clark and Julian Munby.

4. Returning Casework

2016-005853

Shrivenham: St Andrew

Dorchester I Rule 9.9: No

Rule 9.6: No

Case type: New facilities

Case officer: JS

Introduction of toilet, kitchen and meeting facilities in the north aisle

Submission documents: Statement of Need Proposal drawings Photographs

Consultees: HE, CBC, SPAB, LPA

Project architect: Christian Randall

Times on agenda: 2

Reviewing DAC members/advisors:

Submitted to DAC: May 2018

Visited: June 2018

Report: NA

On Heritage at Risk Register: No

Major Parish Church: No

Significance of fabric affected: Moderate High

Memorials / burials affected: No

The DAC resolved to support the principle of the proposals and delegated consideration of detailed design to a subcommittee prior to the issue of a supportive NOA.

2018-027087

North Aston Dorchester I Rule 9.9: No

Rule 9.6: No

Case type: OBC

Case officer: SH

New stained glass window & stone repairs to window reveal to the east window of the Anne Chapel

Submission documents: Design statement, photos, statements.

Consultees: LPA , Historic England, Church Buildings Council, SPAB.

Project architect: Artist: Nicola Hopwood

Times on agenda: 2nd

https://facultyonline.churchofengland.org/FAS/ApplicationDetails.aspx?id=21379


https://facultyonline.churchofengland.org/FAS/ApplicationDetails.aspx?id=27087#ApplicationDetailsFiles


of 20


Submitted to DAC: Oct 2018

Visited: NA

Report: NA



Significance of fabric affected: moderate


The DAC resolved not to object to the proposal, on the proviso that interpretation explaining the theology of the window is made permanently available in the church. The DAC expressed a preference for the all caps type face and for the smaller medieval fragments of glass to be stored in the secure display case within the church. The ACBO to remind the parish that an image of the proposed window design must be displayed next to the corresponding public notice, along with the other submission documents.

2018-028862

Bampton St Mary 627236


Rule 9.6: Yes

Case type: OBC

Case officer: LK

To refurbish the pipe organ, using the only remain historic parts and to relocate the organ in an elevated position against the east wall of the south transept.

Submission documents: Available here

Consultees: CBC, HE

Project architect: N/A

Times on agenda: numerous

Reviewing DAC members/advisors: David Clark, Jeff West, Barry Williams, Roy Woodhams

Submitted to DAC: 22.2.19

Visited: Feb 19

Report: NA





Previous DAC minute: The DAC resolved to support the scheme as proposed by Peter Collins (which did not include the elevating of the organ) and a faculty was subsequently granted.

The DAC resolved to support the principle of the organ restoration, the work being carried out by the chosen contractor and the principle of elevating the organ in the south transept, with the proviso that digital stops are not to be used. The SCBO to notify the parish and encourage them to progress the design of the supporting structure collaboratively with the architect, organ builder and structural engineer for detailed designs to be considered by the subcommittee prior to issue of a supportive NOA. The fixings into the floor and east wall of


of 20

the south transept to be minimised as far as possible.

2019-030474

Quarrendon (Aylesbury) St Peter & Paul

Buckingham Unlisted (modern)

Rule 9.9: No

Rule 9.6: No

Case type: OBC

Case officer: SH

Disposal of organ by sale to St Chad’s RC Church, Birmingham

Submission documents: Correspondence with recipient church, DAC organ adviser comments, photo

Consultees: BIOS


Times on agenda: 1st

Reviewing DAC members/advisors: Mr B Williams, Archdeacon of Buckingham

Submitted to DAC: Jan 2019

Visited: Jan 2019

Report: N/A



Significance of fabric affected: low


The DAC resolved to support the application for faculty permission, subject to the receipt of

an appropriate specification for dismantling, transport and reassembly of the organ prior to

the issue of a supportive NOA. This to be shared with BIOS.

2017-009544

Headington St Mary 627193

Oxford NL Rule 9.9: No

Rule 9.6: No

Case type: Extension

Case officer: LK

Extension of the church building and reordering of the interior.



of 20


Consultees: LPA (Planning), 20th Century Society

Project architect: Purcell

Times on agenda: 5th

Reviewing DAC members/advisors: Derek Witchell, John Missenden, David Clark, Archdeacon Martin


Visited: Delegation visit (JM, DW, MG, LK) 10/04/17 Project team meeting (LK, MG) 23/07/18

Visit with 20thCS 10/10/18

Report: NA





The DAC resolved to support the principle of the preferred option sketch. The DAC encourage the parish to progress this further with the design team and, when ready, to approach the planners for pre-application advice. The committee made the below comments for consideration by the parish: Is there any requirement for a ceremonial route into the church? The parish should consider the phasing of the scheme and ensure that there are no elements which make earlier work redundant (as the secondary glazing of all windows currently is in phase 1 but many of these will be removed in phase 2) or spaces left inappropriate for their proposed use (such as the 2nd phase introduction to a roof light to the meeting room created in the sanctuary in the 1st phase). A glazed screen is proposed to separate this meeting space from the chancel but may create a visual intrusion, should it be a simple pure form compatible with the church aesthetic? It is not understood why a stage is proposed or where this will go given the lengths take to achieve a level floor throughout.

2019-031245

Hurst St Nicholas

Berkshire I Rule 9.9: No

Rule 9.6: No

Case type: Development

Case officer: SH

Replacement and augmentation of existing extensions to Parish Room (former School House) adjacent to St Nicholas' Church; refurbishment of Parish Room including dry-lining and renewing of windows.

Submission documents: Construction drawings, statements, LPA consultation, tree report

Consultees: LPA, Historic England The Victorian Society

Project architect: Phil Ogley of Oxley Conservation

Times on agenda: 2nd




of 20

Reviewing DAC members/advisors: Arhcdeacon of Berkshire, Rev. S Pullin, Rev D Witchell, Mr J Munby

Submitted to DAC: February 2019

Visited: Dec 2017

Report: Dec 2017



Significance of fabric affected: Low moderate


The DAC resolved to support the draft feedback letter.

2017- 008702

Hazlemere Holy Trinity 627805

Buckingham NL Rule 9.9: No

Rule 9.6: No

Case type: Extension

Case officer: LK

Extension to south side of church and redevelopment of the church interior.


Consultees: LPA (planning)

Project architect: Allen Associates

Times on agenda: 5th

Reviewing DAC members/advisors: Derek Witchell John Missenden Jeff West David Clark


Visited: 31.10.18

Report: NA




Memorials / burials affected: yes


of 20

14.11.18 DAC minute: The committee discussed the proposals at length and resolved to support the drafted feedback letter (in appendices), supporting the majority of the scheme in principle awaiting detailed design on numerous elements. The committee resolved that there was insufficient justification for the removal of the organ loft and organ at this time.

The DAC resolved to support all aspects of the scheme. A supportive NOA to be issued upon receipt of detailed design information.

2016-001378

West Hanney St James 627551

Dorchester II* Rule 9.9: Yes

Rule 9.6: No


Case officer: LK

West end proposals, to include the provision of a meeting room, toilet and kitchenette below a balcony. Relocation of the font and insertion of glass doors to the porch.


Consultees: LPA (sch 2 and planning) HE, Vic Soc


Times on agenda: 3rd

Reviewing DAC members/advisors: Joyce Christie, Helen Ensor, Archdeacon of Dorchester, David Clark, Barry Williams


Visited:

Report: NA





The DAC resolved to support the principle of the works to the west end of the church, the

relocation of the font and commandment boards, the disposal of a number of pews and

expressed a preference for the retention of the pipe organ on the gallery but stated they

would not object to the disposal of the pipe organ and introduction of an electronic organ on

the gallery. Historic England have noted this same preference, despite the larger

architectural impact of the pipe organ on the gallery.

The comments of the LPA and Vic Soc are awaited. The SCBO to write to the parish accordingly.


of 20

5. Pre – application or progress site visits by officers to note

Aldermaston – internal reordering (LK)

Beenham Valence – lighting system (LK)

Brasenose College Chapel – replacement of organ (LK)

Bampton St Mary – works to the organ (LK)

Buckland St Mary – internal redecoration (LK)

Old Windsor St Luke – sale of building (LK)

Old Windsor St Peter and St Andrew – extension and heating (LK)

Holmer Green – heating (LK)

Nuffield – internal reordering (LK)

Lewknor – internal reordering (LK)

Wheatley St Mary – internal reordering (LK)

Merton College Chapel – isothermal glazing (LK and JS)

Cowley St Mary and St John – churchyard security, introduction of a post office (JS and LK

Yattendon – installation of WC (SH)

Great Linford – internal reordering (JS and SH)

Faringdon All saints – intern reordering (SH)

Lincoln College Chapel – lighting scheme trial (SH)

Peasemore – kitchenette and WC (SH)

Ashendon - Bell works, repairs and minor pew removal (SH)

Black Bourton – external WC (SH)

Begbroke – installation of a WC (JS)

Nether Winchendon – QI repairs (JS)

Fringford - installation of WC in an extension (JS)

Sunningdale – reordering (JS)

Kidmore End – pew removal (JS)

Bucklebury – heating and pew removal (JS)

Shrivenham – AV system (JS)

of 20

Shellingford – WC and kitchenette (JS)

6. New cases

2018-024912

Aston Rowant: St Peter and St Paul

Dorchester II* Rule 9.9: No

Rule 9.6: No

Case type: Liturgical

Case officer: JS

Disposal of two pews removed c. 20 years ago to storage in a neighbouring garage.

Submission documents: Statement of Need, photographs

Consultees: None

Project architect: None


Reviewing DAC members/advisors: Rev Canon Jeff West

Submitted to DAC: August 2018

Visited: January 2019

Report: Site Visit Report attached.



Significance of fabric affected: Moderate High


The DAC resolved not to recommend the disposal of the 2 pews to the Chancellor, and to issue a Not Recommend NOA to this effect. The DAC suggests that the parish repair all five loose pews, re-staining those which have been stripped, and place them loose at the west end of the nave. In this way they could either be left in rows or arranged around walls when gathering space around the font was needed. This would allow these pews, which are part of a significant reordering, to be retained in the church without compromising the parish’s need for flexible space. If there is a genuine need for additional space at the west end of the church then the removel of only two of the five pews currently stored there is unlikely to satisfy the need.

2018-027193

Buckland St Mary the Virgin 627500


Rule 9.6: No

Case type: R&C

Case officer: LK

Regularising interior redecoration of the interior which was carried out under interim faculty permission in November 2018.



of 20


Consultees: HE and SPAB

Project architect: Andrew Townsend


Reviewing DAC members/advisors: Bryan Martin

Submitted to DAC: Dec 19

Visited: Jan 19

Report: NA





The Committee resolved not to object to the works as carried out.

Offline Broadwell SS Peter & Paul


Rule 9.6: No

Case type: OBC

Case officer: SH

Refurbishment and augmentation of bells, replacement of corroding bell frame; installation of WC in disused boiler house extension; associated kncing through of door from transept into boiler house; installation of kitchenette facility in north transept and associated removal of items of furniture from ground floor of tower.

Submission documents: Statements, drawings, bells and SE’s report and quotes. Available here.

Consultees: Historic England Church Buildings Council SPAB LPA (for extract)



Reviewing DAC members/advisors: Archdeacon of Dorchester, Mrs H Ensor, Mr B Martin, Mr J Munby.

Submitted to DAC: Feb 2019

Visited: Feb 2019

Report: NA





The DAC resolved to support the scheme for faculty application, subject to the construction details being agreed with the DAC architect, and subject to consultation with the relevant statutory consultees.


https://www.dropbox.com/sh/klfetps90s89hwl/AABymGAszbwAC-gOmdMNgbWta?dl=0

of 20

2017-014601

Fyfield St Nicholas 627307


Rule 9.6: No


Case officer: LK

The west end of the north aisle is to be screened off to accommodate a disabled WC, a

servery, and to provide storage space for chairs. The font, currently raised on a stone plinth, is

to be to be relocated to the SW corner of the church and 4 pews removed from the south

aisle. Removal of the 4 pews to the west end of the aisle/nave will also enable the creation of

an open gathering space. To compensate for the loss of seating and to provide additional

seating when needed it is intended to introduce up to 40 stackable chairs. External

connections to mains water and drainage will follow the line of existing churchyard paths

entering the church at the west end of the south aisle. The servery and store will have no

ceilings to minimise the impact on the plain glazed windows in this location. Introduction of

replacement, preferably non-upholstered chairs.


Consultees: LPA (sch 2), Vic Soc, HE



Reviewing DAC members/advisors: Derek Witchell David Clark

Submitted to DAC: LPA, HE, Vic Soc

Visited: Oct 17

Report: See previous report online




Memorials / burials affected: Yes

The DAC resolved to support the principle of the scheme, with the drainage routes and detailed specification of works and drawings and details of the selected unupholstered chair to be submitted to, and agreed by the DAC prior to issue of a supportive NOA.

offline Brasenose College Chapel

Oxford I Rule 9.9: No

Rule 9.6: No

Case type: OBC

Case officer: LK

The disposal of the organ mechanism and console and the installation of a new organ within the existing historic case.


of 20


Consultees: CBC, BIOS

Project architect: Tim of Lee Fitzgerald



Submitted to DAC: Feb 19

Visited: NA

Report: NA



Significance of fabric affected: Low / moderate


The DAC resolved to support the principle of the proposals and encouraged the college to approach organ builders to produce a specification for the new instrument.

2018-027932

Oxford: St Clement

Oxford II* Rule 9.9: Yes

Rule 9.6: No


Case officer: LK

Disposal of pews from the side aisles, introduction of new furniture in the side aisles, renovation of the existing kitchen, replacement of the dais carpet (to be red), relocation of the font, renovation of the floor, alteration of the nosing of the dais to make this more accessible for those with poor sight, replacement of the existing dais platform, alteration of the pews to make them secure without being fixed to the floor, communion table to be relocated, new storage cupboards in the south aisle, disposal of the pulpit and communion rail, removal of the electric lights attached to the communion table.

Submission documents: Statements of Significance and Need, initial plan

Consultees: LPA (Sch 2) Vic Soc, HE

Project architect: John Radice


Reviewing DAC members/advisors: Derek Witchell, Peter Groves, David Clark

Submitted to DAC: Dec 18

Visited: Jan 19

Report: See attached





https://www.dropbox.com/sh/c18hf0qhv5erv2n/AACrcPbEDzcr8afNrb1rxHFsa?dl=0



of 20

8. Notifications of Advice issued by sub committees since last meeting

Marcham: All Saints DORCHESTER

2018-019718 Sophie Liturgical

Disposal of Redundant Pew Fronts

Kirtlington: St Mary the Virgin DORCHESTER offline Jennie R&C

Preventative conservation and emergency stabilisation of medieval wall painting

Dunsden: All Saints DORCHESTER

2018-028112 Jennie PP & M

Laying of the Shiplake and Dunsden, Womans section of the Royal British Legion

The DAC resolved to support the principle of the scheme, with the exception of the disposal of the pew doors. The DAC supported the draft feedback letter.

2019-030432

Buckingham: SS Peter and Paul

Buckingham I Rule 9.9: No

Rule 9.6: No


Case officer: SH

Disposal of 300 upholstered chairs and 100 further occasional chairs replacement with 400 metal framed oak cathedral chairs (“Canterbury” by Alpha)

Submission documents: Statements of Need, photos, rationale

Consultees:



Reviewing DAC members/advisors: Archdeacon of Buckingham, Val Plumb

Submitted to DAC: January 19

Visited:

Report:


Major Parish Church: Yes



The DAC resolved to support the application for faculty permission.

of 20

Witney: St Mary the Virgin HAR MAJOR PARISH CHURCH DORCHESTER

2018-028924 Jennie PP & M

The laying up of the Women's Royal British Legion standard above the West Door

Shiplake: St Peter & St Paul DORCHESTER

2018-028090

Jennie Development

Creating a new area for the internment of cremated remains

Beedon: St Nicholas BERKSHIRE

2018-028433 Jennie Liturgical Removal of 3 pews

Shrivenham: St Andrew DORCHESTER

2018-026468 Jennie M&E Audio visual system

Didcot: All Saints DORCHESTER

2018-026675 Jennie Churchyard

relaying of paths in new material

Bledlow: Holy Trinity BUCKINGHAM offline Jennie Churchyard

Installation of railings around family burial enclosure

Marston: St Nicholas OXFORD

2018-026370 Jennie Liturgical

Dispose of old lectern and replace with a new one

Buckland: St Mary the Virgin DORCHESTER

2018-027749 Jennie M&E installation of wifi connection

Newport Pagnell: St Peter & St Paul BUCKINGHAM

2018-028086 Jennie M&E

Replacement of lighting in the Chancel

Dinton: St Peter & St Paul BUCKINGHAM Offline Liz Liturgical

depositing of silverware at Christ Church

Fyfield: St Nicholas DORCHESTER

2018-028483 Liz Churchyard

Churchyard tool store installation.

Chesham: St Mary the Virgin BUCKINGHAM

2018-026819 Liz Churchyard

Damage of boundary wall to Bury Lane following collision by car

Goring: St Thomas of Canterbury DORCHESTER

2018-026835 Liz M&E

New Gas connection within the Churchyard to Lybbes Almshouse

Pyrton: St Mary DORCHESTER 2018-028720 Liz Churchyard

Filling in of unmarked burial vault

Beckley: Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary DORCHESTER

2018-026286 Liz R&C

Cleaning and conservation of wall paintings

Kidlington: St Mary the Virgin OXFORD

2018-026648 Liz M&E

repairs to pipe between boiler house and church

Oxford: St Mary the Virgin MAJOR PARISH CHURCH OXFORD offline Liz Development

Alteration to the counter design and shelving behind in the vaults café.

of 20

Cumnor: St Michael DORCHESTER

2018-024136 Liz M&E

alteration to sound system and installation of visual system

Drayton: St Peter. DORCHESTER

2018-028207 Liz R&C re-roof vestry

Bisham: All Saints BUCKINGHAM

2018-024297 Liz PP & M

Introduction of a memorial within the church to Partricia Burstall

Caversham: St Andrew BERKSHIRE

2018-028575 Liz Development

installation of servery in west end of north aisle

Wokingham: St Sebastian BERKSHIRE

2018-018410 Liz M&E

Upgrade to Sound system (retrospective)

Longworth: St Mary DORCHESTER

2018-026597 Liz

Heritage Crime

repair or replacement of lead following theft

Little Marlow: St John the Baptist BUCKINGHAM

2018-027151 Liz Development

introduction of chairs for occasional use

Claydon: St James the Great DORCHESTER

2018-017904 Sophie Churchyard

Repair to churchyard wall - includes excavation

Waltham: St Lawrence BERKSHIRE

2018-022942 Sophie M&E

Additional lighting for South Chapel

Mixbury: All Saints DORCHESTER

2018-022847 Sophie Development

Re-open North door to give access to churchyard open space

Swyncombe: St Botolph DORCHESTER

2018-028380 Sophie Churchyard

Construction of an external WC to the west of the church

Southlake: St James BERKSHIRE

2019-029269 Sophie R&C Refurbishment of car park

Woughton-on-the-Green: St Mary BUCKINGHAM

2018-027248 Sophie R&C works to porch floor

Nether Worton: St James DORCHESTER

2018-021512 Sophie R&C

Access and repairs to bell chamber

Cowley: St Francis OXFORD

2018-021031 Sophie Development

Extension of agreement for siting of portacabin at the back of the church (in part of the car park) - The PCC has agreed that it would like the agreement to be extended for a further ten years.

Boxford: St Andrew BERKSHIRE

2018-027060 Sophie R&C

Improve North side ground level permiter drainage

9. Completed projects feedback

of 20

Lincoln College Chapel Ceiling

Criteria for assessing significance and the potential for change These criteria for assessment are promoted in the Statement of Significance and Need and Conservation Management Plan guidance and used in the Church Buildings Council’s Pastoral Measure Reports and Survey Reports. The internationally accepted standard terminology is given below to show the equivalences. It is included at the end of the Agenda to each DAC meeting for reference. High important at national to international levels =

Exceptional

Moderate / High

important at regional level or sometimes higher = Considerable

Moderate usually of local value but of regional significance for group or other value

(e.g. a vernacular architectural feature) =

Some

Low / Moderate

of local value = Local

Low which add little or nothing or actually detract from the value of a site or area, for example a concrete boiler house =

Little / Negative

OXFORD DIOCESAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR THE CARE OF ... · Page 1 of 20 OXFORD DIOCESAN ADVISORY...

Documents

Transcript of OXFORD DIOCESAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR THE CARE OF ... · Page 1 of 20 OXFORD DIOCESAN ADVISORY...