City frets over aesthetics
By Lina Chung
Aug. 2, 2009 9:51 p.m.
Last month, the city of Santa Monica took a disappointing step backward in the fight for alternative energy by issuing a superficial ordinance that aims to reduce the visibility of existing solar panels.
The Ordinance Pertaining to Solar Energy Development and Design Standards proves that aesthetic pleasure takes precedence over environmental practicality by outlining standards such as “specific height limits, limitations on installation in the required side and rear yard setbacks, and restrictions on visibility.” In addition, such requirements are in violation of the California Solar Rights Act of 1978.
This is an uncharacteristic move from a city that has long been the eco-friendly and environmentally conscious gem of the Westside.
In recent years, Santa Monica has made many achievements in terms of promoting sustainability and lessening fossil fuel dependence. In 2008, the Santa Monica Civic Center Parking Structure received Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design certification. In 2007, voters approved the Clean Beaches and Ocean parcel tax, which funds a 20-year plan to improve water quality. In addition, the city’s Big Blue Bus system almost completely runs on alternative fuels.
So it is surprising that Santa Monica’s City Council has decided to take a stance on something as trivial as the aesthetic appearance of residents’ solar panels. This action potentially violates the Solar Rights Act, which, according to a 2007 report from the University of San Diego, School of Law, “limits the ability of covenants, conditions and restrictions, typically enforced by homeowner associations and local governments to restrict solar installations.”
In addition, the city of Santa Monica is sending a very convoluted message to its residents and surrounding cities: “We’re concerned about reducing carbon emissions, lessening our dependence on foreign oil and fighting global warming ““ as long as it looks good.”
“It creates what we think is unnecessary bureaucratic red tape. There are cities outside the state that are looking at Santa Monica, because they have been an (environmental) leader for years,” said Mary Luevano, policy director for Global Green, a Santa Monica-based advocacy group, to the Los Angeles Times.
Supporters of the ordinance have argued that it is not in violation of the Solar Rights Act because the clause regarding aesthetic design reform is intended to follow California Health and Safety codes.
“From my perspective, the ordinance will simplify permitting for the installation of solar panels, and it still respects reasonable aesthetic concerns,” said Mayor Ken Genser to the Los Angeles Times.
The ordinance’s solution for creating a more aesthetically pleasing environment for solar technology is to “require solar equipment to be installed in the location that is least visible from the street.”
Interesting that Santa Monica is so concerned with the visual plight of solar panels, when the city is experiencing actual problems that deserve the council’s attention.
On July 14, the ACLU sued the city of Santa Monica in the U.S. District Court in Los Angeles on charges of the police violating homeless people’s constitutional rights. The suit said that the police have run a “deportation program” in harassing and arresting the homeless, while the city continues to fail at providing sufficient homeless shelters.
Earlier this year, Santa Monica issued a report that showed the city’s street population has decreased by 8 percent from its 2007 levels with the advent of transitional housing and treatment for homeless individuals.
Regardless, the lawsuit’s claims are worthy of the City Council’s attention, whereas the city’s focus on viewer-friendly solar panels is completely ridiculous.
It’s clear that the city of Santa Monica has bigger issues to worry about. Even if it’s not focused on the ACLU’s human rights lawsuit, then it should concentrate on maintaining its image as a liberal, eco-minded city.
Sure, Santa Monica should be applauded for its past successes in environmental progressivism. But the Ordinance Pertaining to Solar Energy Development and Design Standards is a clear insult to the efforts of the city’s environmentalists and residents.
Santa Monica, it’s not so much about the fact that you have bigger issues on your plate. Simply put, we expect better from you.
Upset your solar panels were deemed too ugly? E-mail Chung at [email protected]. Send general comments to [email protected].
