# / . 4 % 8 4 . / 6 % - " % 2 4HE NEW EXTENSION OF 3T -ARY S #HURCH 3OUTH "ADDESLEY REPLACED A PREVIOUS BUILDING ON A PRACTICALLY IDENTICAL FOOTPRINT $IOCESAN WORKINGS &ROM #ANON $AVID 0ICTON CHAIRMAN 7INCHESTER $IOCESAN !DVISORY #OMMITTEE *ONATHAN $UCK S LETTER IN #ONTEXT @$IOCESAN LOOPHOLE #ONTEXT *ULY CRITICISED THE INVOLVEMENT OF THE7INCHESTER $IOCESAN !DVISORY #OMMITTEE FOR THE #ARE OF #HURCHES IN TWO RECENT EXTENSIONS TO CHURCHES ) WAS SADDENED TO SEE THE LETTER APPEAR WITHOUT ANY PRIOR VERIFICATION OF ITS CONTENT WHICH AT BEST IS BIASED BY -R $UCK S OWN PERSONAL OPINIONS OF CONSERVATION APPROACH AND IN MANY PLACES IS FACTUALLY INACCURATE 4HE7INCHESTER $!# IS FORTUNATE TO CONSIST OF PEOPLE WHO ARE EXPERTS IN VARIOUS DISCIPLINES INVOLVED IN THE MAINTENANCE CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF HISTORIC BUILDINGS /UR CURRENT TEAM INCLUDES A LOCAL AUTHORITY SENIOR CONSERVATION OFFICER AN ARCHAEOLOGIST A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT A SOUND LIGHT AND HEATING ENGINEER A SURVEYOR AND FOUR VERY EXPERIENCED PRACTISING ARCHITECTS WHO BETWEEN THEM ALSO ARE REPRESENTATIVES FOR %NGLISH (ERITAGE THE 6ICTORIAN 3OCIETY AND THE 4WENTIETH #ENTURY 3OCIETY 7E ARE FORTUNATE ALSO TO HAVE EXPERTS ON BELLS CHURCHYARD MATTERS CLOCKS FABRICS LITURGY ORGANS AND TREASURES 3UCH A WIDE AND VARIED POOL OF RESOURCE ALLOWS THE $!# TO CONSIDER EACH APPLICATION IN A BALANCED WAY )N ,ETTERS DIOCESE WHO HAS THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR GRANTING THE FACULTIES WHOLLY DISAGREE WITH -R $UCK S PERSONAL OPINION WITH REGARD TO THE ARCHITECTURAL QUALITY OF THE TWO EXTENSIONS )N RECOMMENDING THE EXTERIOR OF THE CHURCH OR THE CHURCHYARD OTHER THAN SCHEMES FOR REPAIR OR MAINTENANCE OF THE AREAS IT ALWAYS REQUESTS THE PARISHES TO FORWARD A FULL COPY OF THE PROPOSALS TO THE LOCAL AUTHORITY AND THE RELEVANT ORGANISATIONS 4HE FACT THAT THIS HAS BEEN REQUESTED IS NOTED ON DOCUMENTATION THAT IS PASSED TO THE CHANCELLOR AS PART OF THE PETITION FOR FACULTY !S -R $UCK KNOWS AT FIRST HAND WE ARE AVAILABLE TO MEET WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF THESE BODIES INCLUDING THE LOCAL PLANNING AUTHORITY TO DISCUSS THE SCHEMES (E RECEIVES A COPY OF OUR MONTHLY AGENDA TEN DAYS BEFORE THE MEETING TAKES PLACE DURING WHICH PERIOD ) AM ALWAYS VERY HAPPY TO RECEIVE ANY COMMENTS THAT HE MAY HAVE TO FEED INTO THE PROCESS 4HE7INCHESTER $!# HAS VERY GOOD RELATIONSHIPS WITH THE VERY MANY LOCAL AUTHORITIES WHICH COVER THE AREA OF THE DIOCESE AS IT DOES WITH THE VARIOUS LOCAL NATIONAL AMENITY ORGANISATIONS )T IS ALWAYS GRATEFUL FOR ANY ADVICE OR COMMENT THAT THEY CAN BRING TO THE PROCESS -R $UCK REFERS TO A @LOOPHOLE WHICH DOES NOT EXIST IN MY EXPERIENCE 4HE PROCESS IS NOT SELECTIVE WHEN ADVISING THE PARISH TO SEEK LOCAL AUTHORITY INVOLVEMENT QUITE APART FROM THE QUESTION OF PLANNING PERMISSION WHEN RELEVANT )F IT IS AN ALTERATION TO THE EXTERIOR OF A BUILDING OR TO ITS CHURCHYARD CONSULTATION WILL AUTOMATICALLY OCCUR &INALLY ) CAN NOT HELP BUT FEEL THAT A SYSTEM WHICH REQUIRES CONSENSUS FROM A NUMBER OF VERY EXPERIENCED EXPERTS IS PREFERABLE TO THE OPINION OF A SINGLE OFFICER -OREOVER ) AM INFORMED BY THE CHANCELLOR THAT AS A MATTER OF COURSE HE ALWAYS CONSIDERS THE ARCHITECTURAL IMPLICATIONS OF ANY PROPOSAL BEFORE DECIDING WHETHER OR NOT TO GRANT A FACULTY $AVID 0ICTON 4HE VIEWS EXPRESSED BY CORRESPONDENTS ARE NOT NECESSARILY SHARED BY #ONTEXT OR THE )("# %DITOR PROPOSALS THE $!# CONSIDERED WITH GREAT CARE THE ARCHITECTURAL IMPLICATIONS OF WHAT WAS PROPOSED A PROCESS WHICH OCCURS WITH EVERY APPLICATION AFFECTING THE EXTERIOR OF CHURCHES WITHIN THE DIOCESE -R $UCK HAS BEEN EXTREMELY SELECTIVE IN HIS RECALL OF EVENTS WITH REGARD TO 2INGWOOD 3T 0ETER AND 3T 0AUL AND 3OUTH "ADDESLEY 3T -ARY )N SPEAKING OF THE DESIRE TO HAVE SYMMETRY AT 3OUTH "ADDESLEY HE FAILS TO MENTION THAT THE NEW BUILDING ACTUALLY REPLACED AN EXISTING BUILDING ON A PRACTICALLY IDENTICAL FOOTPRINT )N THE CASE OF 2INGWOOD THE FINAL SCHEME SAW A BUILDING WHICH IS CONCEALED FROM PASSERS BY WHEREAS HAD HIS ADVICE BEEN FOLLOWED IT WOULD HAVE BEEN ON THE TOWNSCAPE SIDE OF THE CHURCH AND WOULD HAVE RUINED THE FA ADE VISIBLE TO THE TOWN S PEOPLE 4HE EXISTING TOILET PROVISION IN THE CHURCH HALL WOULD HAVE HAD TO BE ACCESSED BY A VERY CIRCUITOUS ROUTE AND THEN WHEN REACHED THERE WOULD BE A STEP TO NEGOTIATE 7HEN THE $!# RECEIVES A SCHEME WHICH WILL IN SOME WAY AFFECT THE 4HE NEW EXTENSION TO THE CHURCH OF 3T 0ETER AND 3T 0AUL 2INGWOOD WHICH CANNOT BE SEEN BY PASSERS BY THE CASE OF BOTH OF THE EXAMPLES WHICH -R $UCK GAVE IN HIS LETTER ITS DECISIONS TO RECOMMEND THE PROPOSALS WERE BORNE OUT BY THE FACT THAT BOTH CASES RECEIVED THE APPROVAL OF THE LOCAL AUTHORITY PLANNING COMMITTEE &URTHER BOTH MY COMMITTEE AND THE CHANCELLOR OF THE
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgyMjA=