Buildings Group report 2010

 Buildings Group Report on progress in 2010.

Having already reached a broad consensus of agreement for the proposed re-ordering changes in St Mary’s, we started the year in a good position to progress the project. We had also prepared and agreed the Statements of Significance and Need, which are documents required by the DAC (Diocesan Advisory Committee) when any major work is under consideration in an historic church such as St Mary’s. So why does it seem that not much has happened?

The simple answer is that it has, but “behind the scenes” where it is not so visible. In pursuit of our overriding priority to “get it right” the Buildings Group has been in careful discussion with the architect and other consultants so that we can draw up a scheme which, with confidence, we can present to the congregation and wider community for consultation. I am delighted to be able to claim that this position has been achieved and, as I write this in January 2011, we are waiting for our architect to provide the final set of drawings needed to move forward.

You may recall that we are seeking to improve accessibility to the building with a level floor throughout, add under floor heating at the same time, and add facilities such as toilets and a kitchen. Ever since we first developed our list of desired features and facilities we had been struggling with ways of fitting them all into the existing floor plan of St Mary’s, as required to by the DAC. The breakthrough, up there with other great “Eureka!” moments, was during the year when the architect suggested enlarging the tower room into the nave and adding a first floor to it by raising the ringing chamber floor a little. This proved to be the idea we had all been waiting for and the plans quickly developed from there. Another new idea under consideration is to replace the existing organ with an electronic version as this would open up the new tower room into the nave (and is agreeable to our choir).

Our work will soon be dividing into several strands. The first will be to plan a Consultation process which will invite views on the proposals from the congregation, from other existing users of the church (for example the flower arrangers and tower bell ringers) and also from the wider community. The other important body to be consulted is the DAC, who have already informally indicated that what we are proposing is acceptable, but whose formal agreement is essential.

The second strand is to plan methods of raising the funds needed for the planned work to be undertaken. The sum of money will be considerable and raising it will be absolutely contingent upon attracting interest and support from the wider community. These two strands require specialist help and we are very fortunate in having received offers of help from local people who, like many in Burwell, wish to support their local church in more than attendance at services alone. We are very grateful to everyone who is helping in any way, as without this support the work would be so much harder or even impossible.

A third strand is already underway, and that is providing a gas supply to the church. Although we are seriously considering the use of “alternative” energy sources, all our advisers have insisted that we should assume the need for a “conventional” heat source for the time being, and as a back up in the future. In addition, the existing oil-fired boiler is at the end of its life and may fail for the final time at any moment.

So, progress is taking place! We have tried to maintain a display of the latest plans at the back of the church and many people have seen and commented on them. These comments have been taken into account as we move forward so that the final proposals should not be either a surprise or disappointment to the congregation and we are now at a stage where we can undertake wider consultations to ensure that everyone has an opportunity to influence the final plan to be implemented. We take this very seriously; those of us on the Buildings Group are not entirely unanimous in our views so we recognise the need to be open-minded in seeking the majority view.

The whole church will be affected by these changes - the nave, chancel, porches, tower rooms and vestry. With so much to do the work is most likely going to be executed in phases, which will avoid a long closure and give time for the money for each successive phase to be raised.

Phase one is likely to be the nave – levelled floor throughout, underfloor heating, font moved to north aisle, and some of the pews round the edges removed. This will necessitate work on the electrics and sound system and is the reason why it is so important to understand what the final result is intended to be from the outset, as we do not wish at a subsequent phase of work to have to undo any work undertaken earlier. Thus we will continue to move forward slowly, although we are aware that there are many who would like progress to be at a faster pace. Perhaps 2011 will be the year noted in our history for a new vicar, the new vicarage and the start of the programme to update the church!

The Buildings Group has met a total of 19 times throughout the year at a frequency dictated by the workload. It is a subcommittee established by the PCC and to which regular reports are made. We have also held meetings with potential helpers and we have conducted a survey of the congregation and held an Open Evening.

This can be a stressful task and we are aware of the number of hopes which rest upon our work. However we are encouraged by the knowledge that we are held in your prayers and we ask that you continue to pray for this venture; that we are guided to do the right thing and that, as a consequence, God’s work in the parish of Burwell with Reach may be done more effectively and that His message is heard and understood by a growing number of people.

Philip Baker

For the Buildings Group, comprising: Pat Chalmers, Robert Harwood, David Hopper, Pauline Miller, Simon Ogilvie, Simon Rogers, Stephen Walton and Philip Baker.