‘I want to make my listed cottage energy-efficient – but council bureaucrats won’t let me’

Before I sat down to write this, I spent 20 minutes wiping the condensation from every window in my home. 

It annoyed me, because I had spent the previous day scrubbing away black from the build-up of moisture from each wooden window frame – a third of which were new windows and had been painted only six months ago. 

Equally irritating was the fact I’ve just paid my electricity bill, knowing I’m paying roughly £15 more each winter month.

Why? Because my council would not allow me to install 10mm double glazing, nor any other environmental improvements I had planned, such as solar panels on the black corrugated iron roof of the replacement garage, which faces west, out of sight of the cottage.

I am three years into the painstaking renovation and extension of what was an empty, run-down Grade II listed cottage in Hampshire. 

Wanting to breathe life into a property destined for the holiday rental market, in the wrong hands, and make it as close to carbon neutral as an old house can be, I installed an air-source heat pump, water butts and plenty of insulation – but my request to install double glazing and solar panels were flatly refused. 

Well, that’s not strictly true – the council indicated solar panels might be permitted on the grass beside the garage, but not on the black roof, where they would blend in.

I’ve spent hundreds of thousands on the renovation, but if I decided to rent it out in a few years I might possibly be unable to do so because the Energy Performance Certificate (EPC) carried out in February categorises it at “D”.

The cheerful advice with the EPC states that if I install solar panels and retrofit double glazing, the environmental impact of the cottage would be rated a C.

The emissions from my little house might seem small fry but collectively, it adds up: according to the August 2022 government report ‘Climate change insights, health and well-being UK’, UK homes account for 26pc of the nation’s total greenhouse gas emissions.

More worryingly, however, is the news that landlords must upgrade their properties to an EPC rating of C and above by 2028 and a similar ruling on property sales must surely follow.

My frustration is as much with the Government as it is with my local council. Added to layer upon layer of bureaucracy in our planning system is the sheer lack of foresight among those running our country, from the top right to the bottom. 

From the MPs passing the legislation without heed to those at ground-level, to the local planning officers who cannot think to the future nor consider those property owners and tradesmen who are tasked with the practicalities of implementation.

Yes, rules exist for a reason, but where is common sense? 

While of course double glazing would be inappropriate in a stained glass or lead window – both of which benefit from secondary glazing – and PVC double glazing is horrendous at the best of times, surely 10mm double glazing in a new wooden window hand-made by a local joiner is a no-brainer? 

Some local authorities are more forward-thinking and freely allow 10mm double glazing in this scenario. 

Considering my windows cost me £10,000 I was furious to learn, via the press office at my local authority, the New Forest District Council, that there is “no policy” regarding double glazing in listed properties. 

In other words the decision to waste my money was simply taken by the conservation officer.

I turned to Historic England, which has recently issued a joint report with the National Trust, the Crown Estate, Peabody Housing Association and Grosvenor. 

Titled “Heritage & Carbon, how historic buildings can help tackle the climate crisis”, it highlights the inconsistent decision making by local government, saying that if sustainability measures and policies for carbon reduction were better aligned, operational carbon emissions for England’s 500,000 buildings protected by statutory listing would be reduced by up to 5pc a year. 

The report also argues that EPCs “do not allow for, nor consider, the impacts associated with whole-life carbon, particularly embodied carbon, which comprises a significant proportion of the carbon emissions associated with the lifecycle of a building”. 

It summarises that the ambiguity and inconsistency of planning policy and guidance regarding the energy efficiency in historic buildings has left a substantial amount of England’s existing building stock vulnerable to the impending crisis…[and that] it is “important to recognise the current consent regime does not just affect buildings. It affects people’s lives, as well.”

A spokesman for Historic England told me the organisation is working hard with government departments to find a solution, maintaining that reducing carbon emissions and sustaining our heritage are “compatible goals”.

She said: “All historic buildings are capable of becoming more energy efficient and we recognise that they need to be, in order for the UK to meet its net zero targets. 

“We support the need to adapt historic buildings appropriately, to respond to the climate crisis while conserving the qualities that make them so special. It’s not a question of ‘if’ change can be accommodated, it’s a question of ‘how’.

“Taking the right action is essential. We know that it can be done in a way that reduces carbon emissions, improves quality of life and affordability and nurtures the skills needed for a green economy. 

“Measures should only be introduced if they will make a net contribution to lowering carbon emissions and energy costs. Retrofit costs money and there is also a high carbon cost in the short term for the manufacture, transport and installation of retrofit products. 

“Therefore, it is vital that we ensure the right intervention is taken in the right circumstances to achieve our net zero goals.”

The changes cannot, however, come soon enough. 

Considering we’ve heard the world is likely to warm beyond the crucial 1.5C within the next five years, you would think we’d all be trying to do the best we can. 

I’m not the only owner of a listed property in this boat, angry that I will be forced to fork out to retrofit double glazing in the coming years after I was so vehemently denied the right to protect my home, my wallet and the environment with only a minor adjustment.