Planning and Zoning Meeting 14 July

I read somewhere that if you eat something you don't like on the first try, the tenth time you try it, you will end up liking it.

2nd P&Z meeting, 8 to go.

All Public Hearings:

1. Some fella in Chandler's owns 3 lots, want to make 'em one lot. Bill Bricker: HOA's say ok? Yes. Passes 7-0 in favor. (No public spoke.)

2. Hair Salon is back. Not enough parking per city standard. Commissioners concerned about parking issues! It could get crowded! Doesn't this seem like it's the hair salon's problem?

(Side note: Mr Hunter seemed a little "abrupt" with Mr LaCroix, but maybe that's his style.)

Anyhoo, the recommendation seems to be a waiver (?) for the parking space and limit the number of "chairs" inside the salon to 2.

3. Fella with the solar dream is back. City sent out 21 notices, 3 came back: 2 in favor, 1 opposed. The one opposition was from the someone, not on his street and the opposition was only that it was going to on the front of the house, but would rescind his opposition if the panels were on the back of the house. It seemed as the the opposer lives directly behind and would see the panels from his house, but would never see them if the panel were mounted on the front! Odd.

City staff presents its recommendations.

Mr Hunter inquired as to the specificity of the recommendations. (Cuz city has no ordinance, has to be case by case for now.)

Mr Buchanan asked for a picture (more on that later) from further across the street (to see what the neighbor would see, a neighbor who has already stated he would have no problem with the panels.)

He then asked if there would be a glare. There will not be a glare. This was asked and answered 2 weeks ago at the last P&Z. Mr Buchanan was not absent from that meeting.

More: What if the trees go away? 2 weeks ago the tree concern was what if the trees got too big!

Lynn Davis: Will the wiring be visible???????? (Maybe.)

AGAIN she asks about glare because she believes all glass will glare no matter the background behind the glass (which is black.) If this sounds like Deja Vu all over again, it's not from the above reading, she asked the SAME thing 2 weeks ago. Maybe she thought the physical properties of the glass had changed in 2 weeks. (It didn't.)

The company rep and home owner then went into a brief discussion of how sun reflects off the panels and how the sun moves across the sky. Basically, it won't glare. Still. Even if SOMEone on some other council asks the same question, the answer will be the same (Unless the physical properties of glass change.)

(Don't remember who asked): A question of noise was raised. Again. It will still be quiet, nothing has changed from the meeting 2 weeks ago.

More from Ms Davis: Old panels look frosty and tacky! What about maintenance?!? We have to keep it pretty for the neighborhood!

Company Rep: If dirty, no worky. Just hose it off.

Ms Davis: Won't the cost of water to clean and maintain cancel out any monetary savings received from using solar panels?

(Thank God for T.H.)

Too hard to categorize the following, so it'll be kinda random:

Mr Hunter: Where goes the inverter? (Garage)

Mr. Buchanan: Will you have to beef up your roof? (No.)

Mr Bricker: If the manufacturer goes out of business, the warranty is worthless. How can we (the city) enforce upkeep on the panels to make sure there will never be a warranty issue?

Mr Hunter: What city employee can enforce the maintenance?

(What if panels become unsightly or no longer used?????)

Mr LaCroix: (Perplexed by the question?): Not sure how you can write into the SUP "unsightly" or "unused". The city can not regulate the (future) appearance of the panels any more than they can regulate shingle colors. (I thought they did that. Hmm, maybe I'll get some purple ones.)

Ms Davis: How bout a 1-year review to any "nuisance" (ie panel's appearance)!

Mr Bricker wondered if the city could do the review, and if negative have the panels taken down (he didn't like that idea, and neither did Mr Hunter).

Mr Bricker made 2 recommendations for the city's future ordinance:

Have an engineer's certificate to guarantee the strength of the roof.

AND address what the wires will look like on the roof.

(He also made a recommendation after adjournment [can they do that??] concerning how panels would be arranged on a roof .

If you (the reader) were also concerned about how bad the panels will potentially look (at least during summer) if installed today, and baring any sudden death of trees by some mysterious tree disease. This is a real picture (courtesy of Google street view) of the front of the applicant's house. (Even though it's public record, I have removed identifying markings of the street):