Wakefield Consistory Court: Collier Ch, April 2001
St Paul, Birkenshaw, is a Grade II listed church built in 1831. It was substantially rebuilt in 1893. The entrance is via the tower. The main body of the church consists of a nave containing four bays. A fifth bay forms a chancel to the north of which is the organ and to the south of which is the vestry. The chancel is separated from the nave by a rood screen erected as a war memorial. To the east of the chancel lies the sanctuary. The petition to re-order the building was, in effect, an application for outline permission on the basis that different phases of the work would be the subject of separate petitions. The proposals were to create a narthex in the westernmost bay for kitchen and lavatory facilities, to create a first floor room over that, to use the rood screen as the eastern wall of the upper room, to turn the sanctuary into the vestry, to reposition the choir in the enlarged present vestry, to remove the memorial screen to create an enlarged sanctuary space, to move the font, to reduce the size of the pulpit and move it and to install a new glazed portico to the south of the tower to form a new entrance. The DAC recommended the works. Three objections were received. After a directions hearing, all parties were agreeable to the matter being dealt with by written representations. The chancellor considered that the consultation processes that had been undertaken were satisfactory. He went on to consider Re St Luke the Evangelist, Maidstone [1995] Fam 1, [1995] 1 All ER 321, in relation to necessity, and Re St John the Evangelist, Blackheath (1998) 5 Ecc LJ 217. The petitioners identified the areas of need as 'to accommodate our young people', 'to accommodate church meetings' and 'to upgrade facilities'. The objectors stated that the needs were already substantially met by the facilities in the community hall. The chancellor was satisfied that there were needs of a theological and pastoral nature amounting to necessity. He went on to consider the effect of each of the proposed changes upon the character of the church as a building of special architectural and historical interest. He was satisfied that any effect that the implementation of these proposals would have upon the character of the church would not be so adverse that it should not be permitted. Faculty granted subject to each phase of the development being the subject of a further faculty petition.
(2001) 6 Ecc LJ 170-171
