St Pauls Church
Minutes of the PCC held on 2 July 2013 at Charles St, Newport
Present: Justin Groves (chair), Tom Ratcliffe, Matthew Davis, Sue Chesworth (people’s warden),
Mary Kinchin, Dean Roberts, John Lipscomb Dave Pritchard (treasurer), Shirley Wilkins, Glen Wilkins
(warden), Carol Norman (secretary), Chris Watkins (guest).
Apologies: Heather Greenwood
1. Justin welcomed all and opened in prayer.
2. Apologies were accepted as stated above
3. St Pauls Building Update
Justin explained that this extra PCC meeting had been called following the discovery of the building
problems as stated in the minutes of 2 May, i.e. the water seeping in near the corridor and unsteady
beams in the sanctuary ceiling that CRI had reported.
Justin gave the presentation stated below and invited questions at the end:
Introduction
For some while now we have been aware of increased signs of water leaking into the
building, both down the sides of the building and in the roof of the sanctuary. We have
known that some work on lead replacement will be needed and are in the process of
organizing that work to be done. Much more recently it has been drawn to our attention
that there is a problem in the balcony offices with a loose truss. This meeting is to inform the
PCC about what action has been taken so far and what I believe is the right way forward for
us.
Action taken so far
We have needed to and sought to take advice from a wide range of professionals. We have
had visits already from the architect, structural engineer, the DAC (Diocesan Advisory
Committee) and some roofing experts. We have spoken to Ecclesiastical Insurance and also
the RB (Representative Body of the Church in Wales). Apart from one person it would seem
that the consensus is we are not in any immediate danger of the roof falling in and therefore
we are not going to have move out. However there is a problem that we cannot and will not
ignore.
What next
The question is how big a problem is it? The easiest answer is to say at the moment without
further vital exploratory work we are not sure. It is likely that some temporary work will
have to be done straight away. As a PCC and as a congregation we could just seek to fix the
problem the best we can or we could see this as an opportunity to sort the problem out by
turning this into a building project.
Why a building project ?!
As a church we have never considered the redevelopment of the building as completed.
Bishop Dominic spoke powerfully at my induction about the front of the building needing
urgent attention and this was the focus of my first PCC here at St Paul’s and was followed by
a visit from the DAC. Sadly other urgent issues, especially relating to the balcony space cut
across our dreams. But as well as seeking to actually have closure on the initial building
project I think a project would help us to:
1.
2.
3.
4.
creatively keep the walls up and the roof on.
Make the building a self-sustaining resource.
Have more spaces available to us and others?
Serve the local community far more effectively
What kind of project?
1. Probably a phased project. We want to do different things but we can’t do it all at
once!
2. One which is run by a steering group accountable to the PCC that would include Glen
Wilkins, Stuart Johnson, Dean Roberts and the vicar. To keep on top of things and to
keep moving things forward this group needs to be small but it will not only be
accountable to the PCC but it will look to draw in other church members for
consultation and advice when necessary.
3. Community driven one [increasing our profile as a church that serves our locality
and is not afraid to partner with other organisations]
What’s the plan?
In a moment Dean is going to show everyone a very rough drawing but the vision is as
follows:
it is proposed that we install a gallery in the main worship area with steel props to hold both
the gallery and the roof up. The gallery will be a ‘U’ shape with some rooms at the back –
ideally 3 rooms though they have no designated purpose at present. The gallery will go all
the way around the church. Under the gallery, a corridor will be created all the way around
the church, which will be glassed in. This again will be the length of the whole gallery (U
Shaped). It will provide sound proofing, privacy for those who come to church who need to
find a seat, space outside the main worship area for people to go with children who want to
stay a part of the service and space to walk around the church as well as housing stairs up to
the balcony. There will be three entrances- one either side of the church and a central
double door at the back of the church.
The current screen will be moved back so that it forms the starting point of the gallery. The
screen will still be able to be used to section off the main worship area so that a multi
function room with a roof will be available for use, along with the current lounge as extra
space with the kitchenette.
The spire will be renovated so that the entrance will be glassed in. A ramp will be made for
disabled access and under the spire, a welcome centre will be created. The old doors will be
opened up to create an entrance into what will be the church offices/ vicar/pastor’s room
etc. The current porch will be renovated and made into an extension of the welcome area
under the spire. Stairs will be installed in both the current vestry and the current porch to
create upstairs access. It will be important to install a lift for disabled access. A floor will be
put in under the spire and in the current porch to create extra rooms. A corridor connecting
the three rooms will be created with doors off to the different rooms. These rooms may
function as children/young people’s rooms. A further space will be created in the roof of the
church/bell tower either as space for people to use or as storage space. The bell tower will
be soundproofed and secured.
A two storey church hall will be created by extension on the ground of the current memorial
garden. It will have a separate entrance, yet it will be accessible from the church building via
the current prayer room. The bottom floor will incorporate a hall/cafe area with a large
kitchen at the back, comfortable seating, toilets and stairs/lift to the upper floor. The current
cafe will be moved once the hall is created, and the space converted to a prayer
room/counselling room. The upper floor of the church hall will have meeting rooms, Sunday
school rooms and a multifunction room etc. The sound system will be completely
overhauled to fit the new design of the worship space in the church. This will involve a new
speaker system, a relay sound system around the church and a new sound desk, which will
be situated in the balcony.
The current sanctuary will be extended to create a raised stage area to house sound cables,
sound equipment, some storage area under the stage and space for all the band and
lectern/altar. The visual system will be overhauled and upgraded to include a
projector/projector lens powerful enough to display clearly in the church, new screens
dotted around the church for easy reading (especially under the gallery and inside the
gallery) as well as stage monitors for those leading the service from the front. There is also
the possibility of introducing cameras for relay/baptisms etc. The base for this system will be
next to the sound desk in the gallery. Blackout blinds will be installed to block out the sun on
the screen and also to allow us to hire out the building for concerts. A lighting rig/system will
be installed in order to complement the “house” lights already in church.
Dean gave an update at this point about current progress and a diagram of the proposed
changes
Conclusion:
I am very grateful to both Stuart and Dean for the hard work and wise thinking they have
already contributed, and I would like to thank them on your behalf. In a moment I am going
to invite questions and I will do my best to answer them. I will also try my best to group the
questions together so we stay as focused as possible. After we have had questions I will
propose the following:
1. That the steering group be Glen Wilkins, Justin Groves, Dean Roberts and Stuart
Johnson.
2. That the steering group continue their work in order that we might be ready to
apply for a faculty.
3. That the steering group need only refer to the PCC for approval on the big issues
such as costings and final design approval.
Dean circulated a rough drawing of the proposals for the building project stating that the Diocesan
Advisory Committee (DAC) were positive regarding the plans. Justin thanked Stuart Johnson and
Dean for their work in addressing the issues so far and proposed that this group continues to meet
and form a steering group to oversee this project.
Questions raised by PCC members:
1. Sue asked why the church warden was not on the steering group as. Justin explained that it
was decided to keep the group small but there was no problem with Sue joining as church
warden.
2. Sue asked if an architect had seen the plans. Justin confirmed that he had.
3. Sue asked if the existing balcony would stay in the proposed plan. Justin confirmed that it
would as it is a unit in its own right.
4. Sue asked if the garden of remembrance was consecrated ground. Discussion took place
regarding this and burial records would need to be checked. Justin explained that the project
would be done in two phases and that the Diocesan registrar may need to be consulted
regarding this area.
5. Mary asked if the proposed church hall would have 2 floors as this would have an impact on
light in the main building. Justin confirmed that the proposals include a church hall with 2
floors and that options would be discussed with architects to bring light into the main hall.
6. Tom asked regarding the burial underground the main church. Justin confirmed that this
would not be affected by the proposals.
7. Matt asked if there was enough space to build an additional church hall. Dean explained that
the architect who did an initial consultation and a 1:100 two scale drawing of the church
land said that this was feasible.
8. Chris suggested that there were a couple of other churches, e.g. St John’s, Maindee, who
had added church halls onto their main building that the PCC could visit at a later date to
gain a better understanding of how this would work. Dave mentioned that the Salvation
Army building in Tredegar had also completed a successful building project which would be
worth visiting.
9. Dave asked if the lifts would be essential due to the installation and ongoing maintenance
costs for lifts and also asked if the bills from the quantity surveyor and architect would be
paid for by a faculty? John explained that a faculty is the permission that the diocese gives
for alterations to buildings. Justin explained that the main cost involved relates to the
building of the church hall, the first phase (main church building) costs are significantly less.
Advice received from the DAC was that these alterations would be seen in a positive light by
charities wishing to invest in such projects but that a feasibility study would be needed in
the first place and St Pauls would need to partner with other organisations going forward.
10. Sue asked if planning permission would be needed for building the church hall. Justin
explained that the architect was aware of the closeness to the road and restrictions around
this but that planning permission would be needed.
11. Matt asked regarding timescales involved. PCC members estimated 4-6 months to complete
the project. Justin explained that the diocese wants to move to ministry areas which may
result in St Pauls using another church building temporarily whilst the work takes place. John
stated that certain parts of the building would still be usable.
12. Liz stated that she had prior experience in applying for funding and that this can take a long
time to achieve.
13. Justin explained that initial exploratory work was needed in order to undertake initial
investigations more thoroughly to be able to more accurately cost the work. Dean stated
that the structural issue would need resolving no matter what. Stuart Johnson has estimated
the exploratory beam work at approximately £10k, quotation for lead is £350, scaffolding
approximately £3k and the production of a full report costs to be additional to this. The roof
would need to be stripped in places to inspect the level of rot with a possibility to use
temporary covers. To install a prop would cost £5k. Justin stated that the roof issue needs
resolving due to movement which could result in the walls moving. Therefore at the least a
balcony needs to be installed to resolve the roof problem.
14. Dave proposed that a fundraising team be appointed asap to start applying for funds. Dean
stated the PCC first need to accept the proposals and instruct a quantity surveyor.
15. Shirley asked if the current foundations were secure enough to justify the future
expenditure. Dave stated that the structural engineer appointed would investigate this
further.
16. Carol asked if the church currently had enough money to pay for the bills so far from the
quantity surveyor and architect. John estimated these bills to be a maximum of £10k. Justin
confirmed that the rental income would pay for the architect bills.
Proposals
Justin asked for general feedback on the proposals. The consensus was that the plans were positively
received by the PCC.
Justin asked if Sue was willing to join the steering group, Sue confirmed that she was happy to join.
Chris stated that Sue was able to join any sub-committees as people’s warden. Justin therefore
proposed that the building project steering group comprises of: Justin, Stuart Johnson, Glen Wilkins,
Sue Chesworth and Glen Wilkins. Dave seconded, PCC voted unanimously in favour.
A second proposal was made that the steering group be allowed to continue and to apply for a
faculty, PCC voted unanimously in favour.
A third proposal was made that the PCC are only contacted by the steering group on issues that raise
major concerns regarding the building project. Justin confirmed that regular progress reports would
be made to the PCC and minutes would be taken at each meeting. PCC voted unanimously in favour.
Justin proposed that a building project fundraising group is formed, PCC voted unanimously in
favour.
Justin stated that a copy of his presentation would be circulated at the next PCC meeting which
would take place on Tuesday 23 July at 7 pm.
Any other business
4. There was no other business.
5. Justin closed in prayer.