Homeowners Associations:The Enemy Of Solar?

May 15, 2009, 8:15 am
Homeowners Associations:
The Enemy of Solar?
By Kate Galbraith

Kirk J. Condyles for The New York Times

Not all homeowners associations approve of this sort of thing.
John Wood, a homeowner in Woodbury, Minn., wanted to put solar panels on his roof. Last month, his homeowners association rejected his application.

“I felt extremely disappointed,” Mr. Wood said by telephone.

He added: “It made me think that homeowners associations are in place to do only one thing, and that is to maintain the status quo, and they have no interest in any sort of change whatsoever.”

Al Rudnickas, the president of the board of the Wedgewood Association, the homeowners’ group, said that the board was open to less obtrusive technologies like solar shingles. But in this case, “The feeling of the board was that what was proposed wasn’t aesthetically pleasing in keeping with the standards of the community,” he said.

Mr. Rudnickas said that the association invited Mr. Wood to submit a modified application, but Mr. Wood — who is the first homeowner in the association to apply for solar panels — said he was not sure whether he will do so.

Mr. Wood’s case, first reported in the Woodbury Bulletin, has echoes around the nation.


In Somerset County in New Jersey, a homeowner was ordered to take down 28 panels.

In California, another homeowner, Marc Weinberger, sued his homeowners association last year after his efforts to put solar panels on his roof were rejected.

Mr. Weinberger and his lawyer, Michael McQueen, have since told Green Inc. that their motion for summary judgment was granted, and Mr. Weinberger installed a system early this year.

In another California case, Marty Griffin, a homeowner in Santa Clarita, applied to put solar panels on a hillside on his property. The association said no, but he went ahead anyway and got sued.

The litigation has been under way for more than a year. Mr. Griffin says the association did not respond in a timely way to his application; a lawyer for the association, Ricardo Cestero, told Green Inc. that Mr. Griffin “did not follow correct procedures.”

Mr. Griffin details his saga, including legal documents, on his Web site.

For solar installers, the roadblocks can be frustrating. John Berger, the chief executive of Standard Renewable Energy, a Houston-based firm that designs and installs solar systems for homes, said that the homeowner associations’ prohibitions had already cost him more than $1 million in business.

“It is a big problem,” he said.

Lawmakers in Texas are considering a bill that would prevent homeowner associations from banning solar panels, and similar laws are already in place in a dozen or more states, according to the Database of State Initiatives for Renewable Energy — including Arizona, Colorado, Florida and California, among others.

Mr. Wood said he planned to contact his state legislators in the hopes of enacting this type of law in Minnesota.

The laws, however, are rarely comprehensive, as some of the California cases suggest.

Rusty Haynes, a project manager at the North Carolina Solar Center, which manages the D.S.I.R.E. database, said that some applied only to new construction, and others might be vague or limited in scope.

In Arizona a few years ago, a homeowner was challenged over the color of her panels (they were apparently too dark), despite a state law intended to smooth the process.

Readers, we would love to hear from you as we potentially develop this story for the paper. Has this happened in your community? Is this an issue for you? Feel free to comment below, or e-mail us at greeninc@nytimes.com.

Alternative Energy, Architecture, Buildings, Consumers, Government Policy, News Sources, aesthetics, Arizona, california, colorado, homeowners associations, minnesota, new jersey, solar, solar power, Texas Related Posts

From Green Inc.
Can Clean Energy Revive Manufacturing?
Marketing Solar Panels to Fifth-Graders
Solar Manufacturing: Not So Sunny
Energy Ballot Initiatives Around the Nation
A Sign of Maturity in Renewables?
A Disconnect From Oil PricesFrom Around the Web
Digital Trends
Gyy-Whiz, It's a Solar-Powered Netbook
sustainablog
Bold Prediction for Rooftop Solar in Britain: Grid Parity by 2013
The Guardian
Cost of solar energy will match fossil fuel electricity by 2013, claims Solarcentury
Treehugger
UK Solar Price to Match Fossil Fuels by 2013
WorldChanging: Another World Is Here
Energy and Global Warming News for May 13
What's This?

The Danger of Inaction:
A Chat With Thomas Homer-Dixon
Next post

Nuclear Science Studies Back in Vogue?
10 Comments
1. May 15, 2009
11:41 am

Link
These issues with associations seems ridiculous at this time where we are trying to move toward greener energy sources!!!

— Tom L.

2. May 15, 2009
11:50 am

Link
That homeowner associations in non-gated communities can have so much influence over their neighbours’ renovation decisions surprised me.

There are inspiring examples, however, of community groups that not only invite solar into their neighbourhoods but also organize themselves to establish purchasing collectives to reduce the capital costs for homeowners.

A couple of solid examples from Toronto:
The Riverdale Initiative For Solar Energy (RISE)
http://riseagain.ourpower.ca/Portal.aspx?portalid=1

The West Toronto Initiative for Solar Energy (WISE)
http://wise.ourpower.ca/Portal.aspx?portalid=14

— john lorinc

3. May 15, 2009
11:59 am

Link
Another indicator of the ridiculousness of homeowner associations. Isn’t it a little un-American to have to pay a bunch of random people to tell you what you can and can’t do aesthetically with your home?

First it was clotheslines, now this. If I lived there and had kids, they would be well supplied with toilet paper and shaving cream. And they wouldn’t have an early curfew.

— Adam Koeppel

4. May 15, 2009
12:04 pm

Link
My understanding here in California is that The Solar Rights Act (California Civil Code 714) prohibits cities and Home Owner’s Associations from restricting solar panel installations unless they pose a risk to the health or safety of nearby residents.

I find it difficult to believe that any properly installed solar panel would preclude their being put up under this law.

As a huge solar advocate on my blog, Dear Solar Fred, http://www.solarfred.com, I am concerned by Mr. Rudnickas feelings of not wanting to go through the hassle of fighting this. Lawmakers need to make these types of issues a clear summary judgment and discourage HOA lawsuits.

The argument by HOAs is that the panels are ugly and would therefore bring down property values. I would argue that Solar panels actually raise the home values and I’m backed up by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development that says that your home’s value rises $20,000 for every $1000 in reduced yearly electricity cost.

An average 4KW system easily accomplishes an annual $1000 electrical savings. Even a smaller system will raise the homes value by $15,000.

I also believe that trends in green (evidenced by this blog and the ones on the blog roll) make an energy efficient and reduced energy costs solar home much more attractive to a buyer than a coal powered neighbor’s home.

These are not pink flamingos! There is a clear purpose for the panels and they also benefit neighbors by making their community air cleaner. It may be a small clean air contribution, but imagine if all the homes did it, what an impact it would make.

— Solar Fred

5. May 15, 2009
12:55 pm

Link
Ontario’s proposed Green Energy Act (Bill 150) specifically prohibits bylaws and condo rules from restricting the use of “designated renewable energy products”. In light of the concerns expressed in this article regarding similar legislation elsewhere it will be interesting to see how effective the Ontario legislation is.

— Russell

6. May 15, 2009
1:48 pm

Link
It was the philosopher William James who noted that we humans rely on those we regard as experts to tell us what is beautiful and what is not. So far, opinions about solar panels may be based more on political orientation than anything else.

Those who are undecided about the aesthetics of solar panels may want to take a look at the spectacular new Kaohsiung “Dragon” Stadium in Taiwan. Designed by Toyo Ito, it is cloaked from head to tail in thousands of solar panels.

It is gorgeous. There isn’t a stadium in the U.S. that can hold a candle to it. The fact that it will produce all of the electricity it uses, and send excess back into the grid to power homes, is just the frosting on the cake. Oh, and the panels also shade the fans.

— Mike

7. May 15, 2009
3:21 pm

Link
Unless the house has a perfect orientation and roof slope, solar systems can be designed in a variety of ways that look different from the street. Some arrays stand up so look more obtrusive. Some are flat to the roof and are an attractive all-black color. There is a trade off between energy production and aesthetics except in a very few circumstances.

We should get used to houses that are in part energy collectors until such time as building integrated solar is cheap and efficient.

— Michael

8. May 15, 2009
3:32 pm

Link
Russell,

I agree, but I believe there is a middle ground now between conservatives and liberals on solar panels, and that is the concept of energy independence.

So to those, HOA members who are reluctant to have solar panels, I would talk to them very sincerely about how solar panels are contributing to our energy independence, which we all can agree is good for America. Now, it’s true that oil is not typically used for generating electricity (as green inc recently pointed out) but you can also make the case that solar panels charging the upcoming plug in electric cars will make a difference in decreasing oil imports and fostering energy independence.

Another point of view could be drawn from becoming more independent from the utility and their seemingly arbitrary rate increases. This is also common ground for both liberals and conservatives.

— Solar Fred

9. May 15, 2009
4:42 pm

Link
Sorry, Russel. I was addressing Mike (#6), in my comment above.

— Solar Fred

10. May 16, 2009
1:15 pm

HOS are UNAMERICAN They put Americans Independents behind looks, what a bunch of stuck up nosed aristocrats. Independents comes before the cost of their over priced buildings, in fact their are part of the problem of the housing crash with their over valued hyped real estate forcing people to take out loans for building not worth the paper they are written on. Now everyone is screwed because all homes fell in price but not the taxes based on the hyped price. UNAMERICAN HOME OWNER ASSOCIATIONS. I WOULD HAVE NEVER MOVE IN SUCH A STUCK UP SOCIETY.

— Gored by bush

What do YOU think? Should Homeowners Associations have the power to deny solar panels to fellow owners and members of the associations? Should City governments have the power to deny solar panels to residents? Wind turbines?