Next steps:
With the building secured, heating working and foundations investigated, we could re-order and develop the church. Though priorities were identified, more detail, consultation and faculties were needed. The Buildings Sub-Committee decided to research other churches. We are grateful to St Michael and All Angels and St John’s, Blackheath and Christ Church, East Greenwich, St John’s Waterloo[1], Christchurch Spitalfields and St Bride’s Fleet Street[2] for their hospitality and generous advice.
All six churches were larger, older and more prestigious than St Ed’s, meaning the advice required interpretation. However, the visits helped develop St Edward’s vision, balancing congregation versus community use, market context, fundraising potential and how the buildings fitted our overall mission.
Context:
On an outer-London Council estate Mottingham would never command City Centre church hire fees; assets included supportive communities, the largest community space on the estate, a record of serving the community and affordability. There was scope to attract projects from further afield if they could provide activities affordable for the local community. Options included public services, music, drama and art.
Visits were also helpful in reviewing fundraising potential. As St Edward’s has no national, regional or even Council-wide profile it could not attract major grant funding. St Ed’s is also ineligible for Heritage Lottery and Historic England funding were because unlisted. Being on local authority and Diocesan boundaries, and not even built when some trusts were established, also ruled out several local funds, not being London enough for some trusts or Kent enough for others.[3] However, as a UPA we could attract funds targeting deprivation and community-led projects, which helped guide us to funders more likely to support the work.
Tendering:
Having relied on our Quinquennial Architect for advice and drawings in the preliminary project stages, securing the building, we were advised that for the larger, ideally more unified, re-ordering project we should appoint a Project Architect. This required a specification against which firms could tender, allowing for different interpretations but within an objective framework and set of outcomes.
For the specification we were fortunate to have support from a semi-retired architect, a member of a church in the neighbouring Deanery and Chislehurst Rotary. His
understanding of church space and mission, and insights from work at his own church, were as valuable as his architectural skills.
Tenders[4] should include:
- Who is commissioning the project:
The legally responsible body, with whom the Architect contracts, usually the landowner or trustees like the PCC. It ensures that contracts, Faculties, Building Inspections and other paperwork are properly drawn. We also included other stakeholders, like the Diocese, to help consultation.
- Key contacts:
At St Ed’s the default contact was the Vicar as PCC Chair and her legal background. Alternatives could be a qualified project manager with delegated responsibility or churchwardens. St Ed’s had no money for a project manager and both churchwardens had no capacity to run the project due to day jobs.
- Descriptions for development site, building age, listed status, historic and architectural features, architects’ plans and Land Registry documents.
- Vision for the building, development aims, current and future uses of the building and the overall Church mission.
- Essential requirements for the design, like kitchens and toilets, improved lighting and floors.
- Desirable additions: Clarity about the minimum specification and extras is vital so that tenders cover essentials and costs for additions are clearly identified. Clarity also shows funders that you understand your project priorities and can still deliver even if not all the funds are raised.
- Draft costings:[5] Having some idea of costings shows professionals and funders that you are realistic about project costs and fundraising. They do not expect precise costs but some idea of your budget and design. A grade One listed building with national importance will have a higher design specification than an unlisted building on an outer-London council estate. Having said which St Ed’s project does include materials from the National Opera House![6]
Twenty Invitations were sent to firms selected from other parishes’ suggestions, google searches and a DAC list. To our surprise, given our location and income, eleven firms responded, of which five were shortlisted using score sheets. Each firm was invited to view the site, explain their plans and quizzed about pricing, working methods, environmental vision and consultation.
Dow Jones Architects[7], recommended by Christchurch Spitalfields, who designed the Lambeth Palace Garden Museum and got the vision, were appointed in November 2019. Meetings were held with the PCC and building committee in December and timetables agreed for site visits (during services and community activities), budget review and consultation, allowing for further questionnaires, drawings and revised plans in summer 2020.
Community involvement and consultation
Consultation happened out on the estate, to a significant extent in the Co-op, handing out flyers, raising the architect’s fees through Crowd Funding and via social media, particularly once the Covid lockdown had been declared. One of the architects who tendered for the work offered a full consultation package as well architectural services and had a good track record of consulting. However, the PCC wanted to do the consultation ourselves, to build missional relationships in our community. The Covid lockdown vindicated this decision.
There was excitement and optimism; after years of dreaming, planning and stalling it was great to progress the project again. The first plans were scheduled for February 2020. At this stage it was still envisaged that, once the church was developed, housing development might be possible.
Dow Jones delivered plans mid-February 2020, which were circulated to the PCC, with a meeting on 9thMarch. By the end of an excited meeting it was agreed the plans should go to Community Consultation, displayed across the church noticeboards for comment and circulated to all who used the site, with scope for wider sharing. Within a fortnight of the meeting the country was in lockdown; church and hall were closed!
Covid 19:
There was a moment of despair that the project would never start as the world descended into unprecedented meltdown. Yet within a week, alternatives were being considered as the church re-invented itself, serving our communities and worshipping God, despite closed buildings.
The hall remained open as the foodbank grew from ten to 200 weekly food parcels. Those collecting food, seeking advice and volunteers, could view plans on the Church site. Plans displayed in external noticeboards were seen by those passing on daily walks. We also used digital media with plans circulated widely through Facebook pages, groups and Twitter. The local Co-op also allowed us to post plans and questionnaires on noticeboards by tills at the shop exit.
This meant that the plans got wider publicity than might have been the case without lockdown. Subsequent publicity and Faculty notices were advertised in the same way. A year later, an NHS vaccination clinic came to the church site, bringing even wider interest in the church and plans. At all stages responses were positive, with lots of Facebook likes and great conversations at the boards in the Co-op.
Original plans and changes:
The March 2020 plans proposed building two floors in the little used, dead space of the Chancel and High Altar. This area would house the kitchen and the vestry would become the bathroom. All areas would be accessible by ramps and lifts; the upper floors would become office, meeting and galleries, with seating over-looking the nave. The Lady Chapel would remain.
Galleries overlooking chapels are a historic architectural feature, incognito viewing for monastery guests attending services without breaching religious enclosure or for hidden, recusant priests to attend Mass. Nobility or those who were ill also attended from private galleries.[8] Galleries are also useful as discreet safeview reception areas.[9] There was something fun about the idea of a gallery in such a tradition.
Consultation increased as restrictions eased and Zumba, karate and boxing resumed. Social distancing during exercise meant that class resumed in the church not the hall, vindicating the church development. A holiday club, crazy golf course, treasure hunts and later the vaccination centre were all new uses testing the church space during the consultation. Schools commented when they returned in September.
As the foodbank grew more space was needed for storage and collection. The Narthex, previously a dumping ground, was cleared. The Crying Room opened as a shop with a collection counter. Side doors locked for decades were opened for access and the church side path and gate were opened, restoring Covid-safe one-way systems and fire escapes. As existing infrastructure no faculty was needed to open the doors, but permissions were needed to open the gateway even though the faculty to board it up was never obtained.
Covid and its aftermath were bringing changes to the building even before work officially began. Thankfully missional and safety reasons for the changes meant obtaining a faculty was straightforward!
Like many churches the safe re-opening of children’s activities raised the largest headache of post-lockdown risk assessments. This was eased by the Chancellor granting interim faculties to replace the Lady Chapel carpet with laminated flooring, which informed decisions about the whole church floor.
DAC visit:
A long-awaited DAC visit in September 2020 boosted the sense that we were on the right track, with a popular plan. It was helpful to have plans appraised by people with wide-ranging expertise, including architects, liturgists, lighting specialists, the organ adviser, DAC secretary and Archdeacon.
It also established red lines. The parish wanted to replace the pendant lighting, as changing lightbulbs required scaffolding, a maintenance nightmare. The DAC insisted the lights remain as an original, distinct building feature. However, they took on board the need to reduce maintenance costs and challenges and to improve the lighting in terms of both effectiveness and sustainability. So, they gave some scope to progress and explore lighting solutions. Installing 10-year LED lighting chips would reduce bulb replacement and bring environmental improvement.
Positive appraisal of the plans and DAC excitement about the project, felt like a green light to explore other aspects of the project too. It was welcome to find that they were less worried about colour schemes, flooring and storage as there were missional reasons for those changes.
Quantity Surveyor…
The first changes to plans were prompted by Covid, the second by financial realities. An important phase of any architectural project is assessment of the practical realities by several professionals.
Services engineers examine utilities, pipe runs, lights and drainage to ensure the plans cover essential infrastructure. A buildings engineer considered the impact of additional floors and a lift and the Quantity Surveyor reviewed the whole structure, architects plans and engineers’ reports, to provide outline costings.
This was sobering. Draft Tendering costs were based on internet research and provisional quotes. The QS costs, produced by a professional with greater market knowledge, factoring in Covid and post-Brexit increases, were a shock. The QS predicted £750,000 costs instead of the £250,000-300,000 for which we had budgeted. Plans had to be re-visited.
The QS used high-end pricing so one option was using cheaper materials. However, the largest cost was foundational engineering to bear the weight of the extra storeys in the Chancel for office, galleries and lift. It was agreed the additional floors and lift would have to go. However, this would leave the kitchen without a ceiling, creating fire and odour risks. A box ceiling would gather dust, with cleaning and maintenance implications; a new location was needed. In new plans the Lady Chapel became the kitchen and the Chancel a new chapel, office and vestry.
DAC Virtual Visit:
New plans were circulated for comment in February 2021. As we were again in lockdown a virtual DAC meeting shared 3D plans via Zoom. The DAC were content with the variations but needed more detail to recommend them to the Chancellor for a Faculty. The problem was faculties were needed for approaching funding deadlines. The Faculty petition was split so funding applications for the kitchen, toilets, floors and lighting could proceed, whilst plans, for the chapel and office, were deferred to a later Petition.
The sprung wood floor was also sacrificed; estimates had increased from £25,000 to £50,000+ with additional carpentry to adjust door heights. Modified would use a floating frame and engineered wood, resilient to subsidence. Exercise groups were happy that an LVT floor, with added underlay, would work for exercise and enhance floor insulation and environmental sustainability.
Funding and Faculties:
Revised Petitions enabled new funding applications[10] but two-year deadlines on grants[11] already received were running out. Spreadsheets tracked the interplay of funding deadlines and faculties, prompting conversations to extend deadlines or expedite permissions.[12]
Enabling Works:
In July 2021 the Faculty was granted for the Kitchen, toilets, floors and lighting. However, preparatory works were needed before installing the kitchen and bathroom, including stripping out the vestry and Lady Chapel, new electrical circuits, plumbing, drainage, levelled floors, widened doorways, ramps, ventilation, insulation and making good crumbling plasterwork.[13]
The initial estimate for this work, for which funds were not yet raised, was £25,000. Post-Covid quotes ranged from £56,000 to £80,000+. In contrast to earlier tenders, few firms were interested though we were told the project was attractive.
By summer 2021, there were labour shortages as people extended homes for home working, repaired and improved with lockdown savings and tackled a Covid backlog. We tendered in late August but were still awaiting responses by October. Contractors failed to attend site visits without apology or explanation. It was exasperating but we could not change a market weighted in contractors’ favour.
We eventually received three quotes and appointed the cheapest, all we could afford. The builder was local and the manager of the electrical contract became the (unpaid) Principal Contractor, above and beyond the contracted work. He was an active Christian, attended another church in the Deanery and was a godsend.
Training:
Another aspect of our vision was providing construction training and qualifications. A Big Local grant [14]funded training and the project manager; the DWP Kickstart programme provided trainees’ wages. Older Mottingham residents no longer working due to injury or illness, shared experience and skills with a new generation. This element of the scheme arose from conversations with church members, people attending the foodbank and community activities. They all wanted to give back and support a younger generation in the post-Covid world.
Trainees were recruited at Kickstart training fairs. They took CSCS site safety training before working on site. The qualification enabled them to apply for the Green Card, a passport to construction site work. The Vicar also took the CSCS course to ensure site safety and industry-level health and safety protocols.[15]
By the end of November 2021 contractors were identified and appointed for the enabling works and funding found. As they completed work elsewhere and ordered materials, and with Christmas and New Year imminent, it was agreed work would start in January 2022.
In the meantime, the Kickstart trainees completed clearance work, built a greenhouse, garden furniture and an accessible ramp for a gentleman in the community for whom the church shopped weekly.
[1] All in Southwark Diocese
[2] London Diocese
[3] Chislehurst Society: out of range, not historic enough; Mottingham Residents, out of range; Friends of Kent Churches, in Bromley but not in Rochester Diocese; some London trusts as in Bromley, Kent not London!
[4] A copy of which can be found at Appendix 1, p.
[5] Wide of the mark by the end of Covid and cost-of-living inflation.
[6] Explained at p.??
[7] Biba Dow and Alun Jones, a husband and wife partnership with a wide ranging portfolio that includes Based in Balham and nothing to do with the stock market
[8] Eg Bodiam Castle, Sussex
[9] Eg Bateman’s, Rudyard Kipling’s Sussex home
[10] Viridor/Valencia needed faculties before application, Veolia only before work started.
[11] Laing Family Trust, National Lottery, Congregational and General Trust
[12] More detail is given about funding, spreadsheets and other aspects of the process in Chapter ?
[13] The full specification, with columns for quote, contingency and related expenses is at Appendix 3
[14] A National Lottery scheme which funds areas not organisations.
[15] The online courses used were with CST whose courses, across a range of disciplines can be found at: https://www.csttraining.co.uk
Learning and reflecting 