[Bell Historians] Re: St John's Church Hanley

[Peter Rivet]

Controls over the demolition of redundant church buildings raise interesting
issues and I must admit that I had to look up the answer to David's
question.

It is set out in the government advice note PPG15 (Planning Policy
Guidance - Planning & the Historic Environment).  Paragraph 8.15 says that
in the case of Church of England churches, partly or totally demolishing a
church in pursuance of a Pastoral Measure is still exempt from listed
building control.  However the Church Commissioners have agreed that where
they want to demolish a listed church in these circumstances they will ask
the Secretary or State if he wishes to hold a non-statutory public inquiry
where English Heritage, the local authority or any of the recognised amenity
bodies put forward reasoned objections.  Interestingly this doesn't apply to
places of worship of any other denomination - the view taken by the Courts
is that a building cannot be considered to be in use as a place of worship
if it is totally demolished, so they would need consent to knock it down if
it's listed.

But paragraph 8.17 of PPG15 goes on to say that when a Church of England
building is no longer in regular ecclesiastical use, it is fully subject to
the normal listed building controls.  This applies once the declaration of
redundancy under the Pastoral Measure comes into operation.  The same also
applies to those churches vested in the Churches Conservation Trust, even
though church services are held in most of them on an occasional basis.  I
have looked up English Heritage's listing description for St John's Hanley
and it describes it as "now disused" so I would have thought that it is
fairly clear that it is now within the remit of the local planning
authority.

The reason that St Johns is listed grade II* is because it uses cast iron
structural and decorative components, notably the gallery columns, the
window frames and the castellations.  The church was built in 1788-90.  It
is thought that these components are some of the earliest to have been used
in any type of building in Britain, only those at St James Liverpool of
1774-5 being identified as earlier.

Contrary to what I expected the listing description does mention the bells,
which is unusual in the case of twentieth century ones:  "Bell chamber with
peal of 10 bells, the original peal of 8 bells cast by Edward Arnold of
Leicester and installed in 1791, supplemented by two additions in 1891, and
all re-cast and rehung from a contemporary bellframe in 1923".

Peter Rivet




  -----Original Message-----
  From: bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com
[mailto:bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of David Bryant
  Sent: 14 March 2007 21:33
  To: bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com
  Subject: RE: [Bell Historians] Re: St John's Church Hanley


  "In reply to the comment by Giles Blundell - in fact it's the other way
  round.  Ecclesiastical exemption means that the Church of England, the
Roman
  Catholic Church and a few other denominations which are considered to have
  adequate procedures in place for dealing with alterations to places of
  worship don't need to apply for Listed Building Consent.  This means that
  the local planning authority doesn't have to get involved in fonts, bells
  and other things that require a Faculty.  But churches still have to apply
  for planning permission for external works, including alterations,
  extensions and access ramps."

  But as I understand it, the faculty procedure still applies, rather than
  secular planning controls, under certain circumstances if the building is
no
  longer used as a church but still owned by the diocese - hence my question
  about whether it has been deconsecrated.

  David

  --
  No virus found in this outgoing message.
  Checked by AVG Free Edition.
  Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.11/722 - Release Date:
14/03/2007
  15:38




  
           
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ringingworld.co.uk/pipermail/bell-historians/attachments/20070316/aad03a17/attachment.html>