THE Consistory Court of the diocese of Carlisle has granted a school authorising the installation of 28 solar panels above the roof of St Anne’s, Ings, despite the refusal of planning permission the Lake District National Park Authority.
St Anne’s is a Grade II* listed Georgian church in-built 1743. The refusal by the Lake District National Park Authority, which is the local planning authority, to grant permission in November 2023 was based on its reasoning that the church contributed to the character of the realm, and that the solar panels represented a visible intrusion that may have an “hostile impact on the outstanding universal values of the English Lakes World Heritage Site and . . . the character of the realm”.
Normally, the refusal of planning consent would make the pursuit of a school redundant. The petitioners, nonetheless, who were two churchwardens and a member of the PCC, intended to appeal against the refusal of planning permission.
The petitioners stated that the installation of the solar panels would have two beneficial advantages. First, it will enable the church to grow to be near carbon-zero, thus reducing its environmental impact. Second, there can be a positive impact on the financial security of the church. The petitioners emphasised that the church’s energy bills had increased to “an uncomfortably high level”, and the monetary value to the church of a solar-panel installation can be about £2040 p.a.
Before in search of the college, the petitioners had consulted the amenity societies. The Church Buildings Council made no objection to the proposal. Historic England, Historic Buildings and Places, and the Georgian Group, nonetheless, objected to the proposals, mainly on the grounds of the panels’ visual impact on this historic church.
The Chancellor, the Worshipful James Fryer-Spedding, said that his assessment was that the moderate harm that may result to the importance of St Anne’s from the implementation of the proposal was outweighed by the advantages of putting in a solar-panel system. The Chancellor had arrived at that conclusion in view of the “magnitude of the advantages that the petitioners [had] identified and from two further specific aspects”.
The first was that, in its website, the Church of England had expressed its approach to net-zero-carbon planning principles in immediate and imperative calls to motion directed at “all parts and levels of the Church of England”. That was an approach based on theology, and an express recognition that, as the web site stated, “the worldwide climate emergency is a crisis for God’s creation.”
Furthermore, the Church of England embraced the decision to net-zero carbon as an integral a part of its mission to look after creation, achieve climate justice, end poverty, and create a viable future for this and future generations.
The Chancellor said, nonetheless, that that shouldn’t be taken as giving a “trump card” to petitioners in every case where there was a proposal to pursue net-zero carbon in a listed church. But the Church’s missional approach on climate change was a very important matter to be taken into consideration.
The undeniable fact that proposals were reversible was essential. Where proposals weren’t only able to being reversed, but have to be undone after a certain time frame, that was a way wherein harm is perhaps restricted, the Chancellor said. A fleeting and fully reversible intervention with a listed constructing can be less harmful to its significance than a everlasting and irreversible one.
In the current case, the installation of the solar panels was completely reversible. After their expected lifespan (expected to be about 25 years) had elapsed, it will be possible to remove them and their associated fittings from the roof completely, in order to depart it because it was before.
The faculty was granted, but, before it’s implemented, the petitioners must obtain planning consent. It can also be a condition that, by 1 May 2050, all solar panels have to be completely removed, and any resulting damage to the roof made good.
