East Yorkshire Methodist Church faces closure unless plans approved
A DRIFFIELD church could be forced to close if a major redevelopment is not approved, according to worshipers.
A planning application has been submitted to East Riding Council to demolish Driffield Methodist Church and erect a new chapel at the same spot.
-
Driffield Methodist Church facing uncertain future
Members of the church say the development would secure its future for more than a century.
Richard Mole, secretary of the Custodian Committee at the church, said spiralling maintenance costs are threatening to close the church.
This Friday Mexican night at The Black Bull, Burton Pidsea, Two...
View detailsIndulge with our delicious range of specially selected Mexican dishes available from 5pm to 8:30pm this Friday 21st June. Traditional evening menu also available.
Terms: Terms: Friday the 21st June only, from 5pm to 8:30pm. Offer includes two main Mexican courses. Minimum 2 people dining.
Contact: 01964 770402
Valid until: Saturday, June 22 2013
"The main intention is to build a chapel that better suits the purpose of the users," he said.
"Methodism is about community and bookings at the church have never been higher, so it is essential we provide a building that is suitable.
"The current maintenance costs are bringing the accounts down and are leading us closer to bankruptcy.
"If we don't make these changes then the costs would be such that we would not be able to afford to keep it open. We are not going to just walk away from Driffield. We still have a function to perform here but if we cannot redevelop the site then we would have to look elsewhere."
The plans include transforming the existing two-storey chapel into a single-storey building while retaining the school and playgroup areas.
An initial planning submission was withdrawn by the Custodian Committee after English Heritage aired their concerns.
Officers from English Heritage visited the site in Middle Street North and ruled the building was not of historical significance and therefore could not be classified as listed.
Although Driffield Town Council voted in favour of the proposals, Mayor Joan Cooper said she would be disappointed to see the chapel replaced.
"The future of the church is vitally important to the town but so is keeping this historic building instead of replacing it with a modern build," she said.
"It is part of the street scene of Driffield and I would be very reluctant to see that go as it would, quite literally, leave a big gap in the town.
"It is a beautiful building with a lot of history. This idea of replacing historic buildings with modern ones is something the Methodist church is doing a lot across the region and I think it's a real shame.
"The structural part of the church is sound but the interior needs updating, there is no question about that."
Mr Mole, who attends the church, said the new chapel will be as eco-friendly as possible.
"The changes will make the building inexpensive to run, which will benefit everyone," he said.
"We closed the upstairs worshipping area last year and have saved thousands of pounds on heating bills.
"The people who have the most commitment to the church, such as couples who have married here and the people who attend the church, are those I thought would have been the hardest to win over but they want this to happen because they understand the need for it."
A consultation period has begun with the council and a decision is expected in June.
3 Comments
by vanityunfair
Friday, March 22 2013, 4:54PM
“The obvious lesson for architects, that so many of them seem to have learned, is to design only bland or ugly buildings so that when the time comes to replace them there will be no argument about the value of the building.
Driffield Methodist Church is certainly striking, with its mixture of late Victorian (1880) and 1960s design but is it worth keeping as a building? The facade is of non-local material so it is bound to stand out from its surroundings and the interior has aready been altered so that the original space has been lost. Accessiblity is limited for disabled visitors and heating costs are high.
English Heritage has declined to list the building but, seemingly without having inspected it, does not support demolition and has not expressed approval of its proposed replacement (http://tinyurl.com/apc5s4j).
Nickolaus Pevsner (The buildings of England) was not impressed by it. The custodians are finding it difficult to maintain economically. The town council is in favour of redevelopment. The only person who seems to want to keep the old building is the mayor. There might be others not found by HDM's reporter.
Would retentionists be willing to subsidise the running costs of the present church?
I would really like to see detailed proposals for the replacement. The Design and Access Heritage Statement is at http://tinyurl.com/avc7p6c but is not illustrated. The architect's projections in the Assessment and Justification Paper at http://tinyurl.com/afuv4fu and in the ERYC documents at http://tinyurl.com/b87kauh probably outdated but, anyway, look more industrial than ecclesiastical. And that, I suppose, is the real problem; designing something that is undoubtedly a Methodist chapel that is modern but integrates with the vernacular architecture and manages to comply with all the contemporary rules and regulations. Good luck with that.”
by dontwo
Friday, March 22 2013, 2:03PM
“The cost of demolishing this church, then the cost of getting a designer and the usual army of consultants, then the cost of a new building being put up must be massive. Massive enough to cover the costs of maintaining and running this piece of Driffields history for a long long time I bet, so the Methodist churches plea of poverty seems a bit of a fib if they can suddenly afford all that lot, yet cant afford to insulate and improve the original place.
This is a "real" building. It looks the part.It has real character. It actually means something to the people of Driffield. It is a symbol of their community. Methodism is about community?. To knock this grand building down and replace it with what could be a plastic palace or an aircraft hanger?. The new one might be more efficient in being warmer inside,but without the character, the look, the tradition and the history of the one it replaces, it will just be a soulless cold place from the outside. The Methodist church should stop saying they "may have to look elsewhere" because that sounds like they have every intention of walking away from the people of Driffield if any dare object to these redevelopment plans.”
by TheMarketX
Friday, March 22 2013, 10:53AM
“Great, one of the only nice old buildings in Driffield.”