The "Sunshine State." That Could Be Useful.

I had a plan.  My plan involved solar panels on my roof.  I contracted for 21 panels, and my intention was to put them on the north-facing roof, which is the front of my house, the south-facing roof, and some on the side-facing roofs.

My reasoning was this: most days of the year, the sun is south of us.  But in the summer, when the electricity demand (and my electric bills) are highest, the sun is mostly north of us.  For a few hours in the middle of the day, the arc places the sun more or less directly overhead.  So I wanted north-facing panels to capture solar rays when they're most intense, and I need them the most.

The procedure for solar panels is to present a plan to the Planning and Zoning Board, which will either approve or not approve of the proposal.  It was not clear to me until recently upon what factors disapproval depended.

The Village's Code is "inclusive."  That means that anything not mentioned in the Code is not permitted.  Solar panels are not mentioned.  But the Village, and the P&Z Board, have established an informal approach to solar panels, so that they can be permitted.  P&Z has chosen to think of them as part of the broader area of mechanical features, which include things like duct work and roof-mounted central air conditioners.  And there are Codes for those.  Importantly, I learned, the Code says no mechanical features can be placed on the roof so they're visible from the street.  P&Z has further interpreted this to mean the street in front of the house.  This interpretation came to have an interesting result.

So, because my desired north-facing panels would be very visible from the street in front of my north-facing house, P&Z denied my request for placement.  They suggested that I should just put all the panels I want on the south-facing, east-facing, and west-facing roof slopes, so they couldn't be seen from the street.  Well, that's fine, except it deprives me of as much solar energy as I can get when I need it the most.  So, I argued with P&Z.  But they were rock solidly firm in their refusal to tolerate solar panels that would be visible from the street (in front of my house).  One member of the Board even pointed out that she considers it her job, and the Board's job, to protect the Village (from me and my unsightly solar panels).  She also pointed out that it seemed to her that I self-centeredly just wanted whatever I wanted, and I didn't seem to care about anyone else or the Village as a whole.

I made a number of arguments to P&Z.  I pointed out why it was best, in terms of best function, for some panels to be north-facing.  I pointed out to the Board that they were just making up their own rules anyway, since solar panels are not addressed in the Code, but we approve of them anyway, and even if they could be imagined to be something like "mechanical features," they're functional in a unique way that depends on where they are, which is not true of any other mechanical features, and that the Board was being inconsistent.  Here are the inconsistencies.  Some years ago, this same Board approved a new home design on 6th Avenue, and that home has solar panels.  They are visible from the street (6th Avenue) in front of the house.  More recently, this same Board approved a new home design for a two-story house on 119th Street, and that house has a large array of solar panels.  Those panels are all on the south-facing roof slope, but, because the house is two stories, the panels can be seen from the street behind the house: 118th St.

But P&Z was immovable.  The answer was no.  They did offer me one other option, though.  I could request a variance.  In theory.  But for anyone to get a variance request approved, it has to be accepted by the Commission.  This is the current Commission, which is the same Commission that would upend any rock to find anyone at all to be on a Board so that the Commission (Tracy Truppman) would not have to appoint me.  So no, I can't get a variance request granted by this Commission.  It's a personal vendetta for Tracy, and she has no greater pleasure than to tell me no about anything.

As it happens, because I had to make a meteorologic argument to the Commission, whose members believed the sun is never north of us (really?), I brought along an expert witness.  I brought Brian McNoldy, who is a friend of mine, a BP resident, and a meteorologist.  Brian later wrote to me as follows:  That is a very odd board right now, with an awkward and unprofessional dynamic. Kind of hard to describe unless you experience it in person. 

Solar panels should be encouraged to the point where if someone wants to cover their entire roof with them, go for it! It looks good; it is good [Emphasis mine].  However, they are functional hardware whose ideal placement is dictated by nature, not humans. Someone's comment about Coral Gables not allowing them on the front-facing parts of roofs was absurd. What does that have to remotely do with us? With cars parked on lawns and trash out anytime anyone feels like it, Biscayne Park is most definitely not emulating Coral Gables in any way. Visible solar panels is sooooooooooo far down on the list of concerns that why even bother questioning a homeowner.

In your case (and in ours should we want to add them), a north-facing house would logically put solar panels on the north-facing roofs to gather the most amount of watts in the summer months. There is no question about that. During the October-March portion of the year, those panels would not be nearly as efficient, but that's also when our electric demands are less. South-facing panels would be the big winners during those months.

I had to try not to laugh when Elizabeth said the sun path diagram I gave them was "abstract" and she couldn't be bothered with it.  It's about as real and non-abstract as it gets... you can literally hold it in your hand and read off exactly where and when the sun will rise and set and reach its highest point in the sky on any day of the year.  Quite handy for planting a garden or installing solar panels!  But you only need to live here for a year to learn what it shows anyway... if you pay attention to shadows and what windows and plants get sun when.

I also wrote to Chuck Ross, to keep him informed of the details of my effort, because he takes an interest.  When I told Chuck what was the outcome of my effort, he wrote to me as follows:  The position that the sight of solar panels on the front of a house, that your request somehow compromises the look of the Village and is selfish on your part, is absurd and a joke.

Two people, not in the same place at the same, both used the word "absurd."

Back to the drawing board for me and the solar panel contractor.  The contractor had an idea for how to maximize the availability of the east- and west-facing roof slopes, and part of the south-facing slope: cut back, or down, the trees.  I told them that this is Biscayne Park, and we don't cut down trees to make room for solar panels.  At least P&Z seemed to appreciate the prioritizing, but it didn't change their minds.  I, and Brian McNoldy, and Chuck Ross, and "god," are all wrong, and P&Z, with its sense of what does or should look good, is right.  It could do us a lot of good to be the "Sunshine State."  But it doesn't have to.  We could squander our advantage instead.