NIMBYism Alive and Well, Even in Sunny California

Not In My Backyard (NIMBY) syndrome is well documented in the wind energy sector. In short, it’s difficult to hide a wind turbine — no matter what size. Nantucket property owners, for instance, have long resisted progress of the Cape Wind, a project that aims to site 130 offshore wind turbines in Nantucket Sound. While the property owners justify their opposition by emphasizing the environmental impacts of the proposed project, it’s difficult to not see an element of NIMBYism in their motivations.

Compared to a large-scale wind project — or even a residential scale turbine — a rooftop solar PV system is undeniably unobtrusive. But, as this story from ABC 7 News in San Francisco makes clear, that doesn’t mean neighbors will always agree.

The owners of a three-unit building in the Upper Haight District had no idea their new $77,000 solar installation on their roof would create so much resentment. They’ve followed every code and every rule.

…

Doug and Karen Kitt showed up before the San Francisco Board of Appeals Wednesday evening to keep their solar project alive. Their neighbors Maureen Gannon and Rohit Verma live behind the Kitts and filed a formal complaint against them. They say ever since the panels went up, their lives haven’t been the same.

…

Gannon and Verma say the panels obstruct their view, harm the character of the neighborhood, and pose a hazard in the event the panels fly off during high winds. They asked the panels to be tilted lower, but the Kitts say that would require redoing the whole project and they maintain their solar system is safe, which was backed up by a representative of the department of building inspection.

“We found that they were all within reasonable design limits for winds,” says Laurence Kornfield from the Department of Building Inspection.

In the end, the Board of Appeals voted unanimously in favor of the Kitts saying there is no safety issue. Plus, they say the goal is to encourage green efforts, not discourage them.

To be sure, the neighbors have a right to voice their concerns. But, as the Board of Appeals found, the basis of their argument was pretty flimsy. Bottom line: in an ideal world, neighbors would communicate prior to an installation. While an open exchange might not allay everyone’s concerns, at least neighbors would feel that their voices are heard. It’s the neighborly thing to do.