Solar Rentals - and HOA

[Daniel_6]

Hi All, Does anyone know if Tesla will install on homes with an HOA? I own my home (Southern California) but have an HOA that covers the roof. My board advised they will allow solar panels but I'll be responsible for roof repairs going forward (along with 20 other pages of terms and conditions.)

Is that something Tesla will deal with or you reckon it'll be a flat out "No Way, Jose" from them?

Very interested in signing up for the rentals in light of the new service they announced a short while ago.

Thanks very much, Daniel

 

[glide]

Tesla may deal with it but if an HOA transferred all liability and repair costs for the roof to me, I sure wouldn’t.

 

[Daniel_6]

Thanks, Glide. I gather my HOA has it structured so that no one in my complex gets Solar Panels.. These were the bullet points followed by a lengthy T&C document. Ugh.. Oh well...

You would need to complete the architectural application, which I've attached. You would also need to provide the following documentation/information as it relates to common area roofs, in accordance with Civil Code 714.1 and 4746:

- the system must meet applicable building codes;

- the system must receive the association's approval;

- a covenant that must be notarized and recorded that includes provisions for the maintenance, repair, or replacement of roofs or other building components;

- the installers indemnify the association and pay for any damage;

- a site survey showing placement of the panels and equitable allocation of usable area among owners sharing the same roof, garage, or carport;

- applicants must notify each owner of a unit in the building on which the installation will be located of the application to install a solar energy system;

- the owner and each successive owner must maintain a homeowner liability coverage policy at all times and provide the association with the corresponding certificate of insurance within 14 days of approval of the application and annually thereafter;

- disclose to prospective buyers the existence of the solar energy system and their responsibilities to maintain and pay any damage to the common areas.

 

[Tam]

...Is that something Tesla will deal with...

You pay Tesla $1,500 and it will remove its system and patch up the holes and it's out of there.

In the meantime, if you signed off the T&C from your HOA, you are responsible for the roof forever after Tesla is gone, unless of course, you can have your next homeowner sign that off when you sell your home.

Your HOA should state that once the system is removed, the roof maintenance should be reverted back to the HOA.

 

[d21mike]

I have a HOA but I am already responsible for Roof. I have to do the same forms and on Tesla order had to say “I own my roof” and something about HOA. Seems that Tesla wanted to know I own the roof.

 

[ewoodrick]

Why would they care? They don't have a contract with the HOA or even know if a HOA exists. That's all your responsibility. If the HOA doesn't like it, you are the one responsible.

 

[d21mike]

Why would they care? They don't have a contract with the HOA or even know if a HOA exists. That's all your responsibility. If the HOA doesn't like it, you are the one responsible.

I think Tesla just wants to protect itself from the crazy HOA people.

 

[ewoodrick]

I think Tesla just wants to protect itself from the crazy HOA people.

So are you then saying that they do care?

The only time that I suspect that they even care is on a shared roof. In that's case, it's not really a HOA it's a condo association. or whoever owns the entire roof.

But in detached homes, there should be no issues.

 

[boaterva]

All I had to do for my HOA is have them approve the plans as they have to do for any significant change. Then I had to just sign the Tesla form saying I’d complied with whatever the local HOA wanted. I did need to get the full plans from Tesla and not the useless one page summary they try to satisfy you with before you sign. Do get the full details so you can tell what panels, inverter, etc.

What HOAs usually want is panel size, placement, whether hardware will be outside, etc.

 

[d21mike]

So are you then saying that they do care?

The only time that I suspect that they even care is on a shared roof. In that's case, it's not really a HOA it's a condo association. or whoever owns the entire roof.

But in detached homes, there should be no issues.

Yes. Exactly as @boaterva said above. Standalone roof. But it was not a big deal. Just procedure. Their goal is to keep property values high for all of us.

 

[Quickstart88]

Hey All,

I am also in a HOA and planning to install solar if my HOA approve it. The question I have is with the smaller 3.8 kilowatt systems some said it generate 10 to 12 kilowatts per day some said 19 to 20 Kilowatt a day. I am in CA and pretty sunny for the most part. Lot's of decision in terms of if the smaller system is enough as I average 20 to 22 kilowatt usage per day or 600 to 700 kilowatt per month. I am thinking of buying over leasing for $65 per month. The fear on lease is you don't know when Elon will increase the price. The smaller 3.8 kilowatt is 10.8K after incentives puts you around 7.5K for upfront cost. However, I don't know if this smaller system is enough. I can't go to mid size system because my carport is 20x20 and don't know if there's enough room. For 3.8K system I figured it's 10 to 12 panels. Not sure how many panel is the mid size system. I figured it's 20 ie.. double the smaller size? But going to the mid cost more.

I am current on the time of use plan or TOU.
over 50% usage is super off peak. 30% off peak, and 20% peak.
That normally put my bill at 110 to 140 per month. Let said a good average is 120 per month.

Anyone using the smaller 3.8 kilowatt systems? How is that working out for you?
Thoughts?

Really interested if buying the smaller system is right for me.

 

[ez123]

I have a 3.8 kW system for a house occupied by two adults in San Diego North County, along the coast where it is frequently overcast. There are 15 300-watt panels (4.5 kW maximum production, limited of course by the 3.8 kW inverter). For aesthetic reasons, they are situated on a detached garage with a pitched roof, not optimally aligned, and there is some shading from trees. The daily average production for just over 3 years is almost exactly 15 kWh/day. The most I've ever generated in a day is 27 kWh (in late June) and the least is 1.6 kWh (on a Valentine's Day). My baseline mean daily consumption for lighting, computer/router/etc, TV, coffee maker, microwave, refrigerator, and other appliances is about 9-12 kWh/day. Air conditioning and a level 2 vehicle charger significantly increase consumption. I have had a PowerWall operational for two months and for all but a few days have not needed the grid. (That will likely change as we enter fall and winter.) Over 3+ years I have accumulated a ~$1700 net surplus balance on my SDGE bill thanks to over-production back to the grid and electric vehicle rebates. Hope this helps.

 

[d21mike]

There are 15 300-watt panels (4.5 kW maximum production, limited of course by the 3.8 kW inverter)

Do you ever feel the 3.8kW Inverter is a "negative limit" compared to 4.5 kW Production? Do you ever hit the limit of 3.8kW during the day which would mean you are limited by the size of the Inverter? You said your max production for 1 day is 27 kWh. So if a 8 "sun-hour" "late June" day that would mean an average of 3.375 kWh per hour? Do you see what I am asking? Maybe the limit of 3.8kW could happen but maybe only for 1 hour on the best day????? It just confusing why you would design in a limit unless it is really not a limit in reality????

I am putting in a 12.29kW system (Est. First Year Production = 20,095 kWh).
Tesla is installing 3.8kW + 7.6kW = 11.4kW inverters.

Tesla is saying that the 12.29kW is "DC" production and the 11.4kW is "AC" production which is what SCE is interested in. They say this is not a problem. This is normal. When I ask about using the 5.2 kW instead of the 3.8 kW or maybe 2x 6.6 kW she said they very seldom use those other sizes.

Other Delta Solar Inverters (from the document describing my inverters):
Transformerless (TL): 3.8 kW, 5.2 kW, 6.6 kW, 7.6 kW

My additional thoughts. Maybe I would not generate the FULL 12.29kW during the day. I.E. as the sun crosses the house your are getting optimal production on some panels but not all of them at the same time so the inverters do not need to be => FULL 12.29kW????

 

[wwhitney]

An economically optimal solar installation has a DC size (panels) that exceeds the AC size (inverters), that is normal. In other words, if the DC size does not exceed the AC size, someone is wasting money and resources.

Cheers, Wayne

 

[ez123]

I'm far from an expert, but I believe as noted above, it's ideal to have the max DC output from the panels slightly exceed the inverter's AC output. When the inverter is limiting it's referred to as "clipping."

I have very little clipping, except on days of maximum production.

See this thread for an example of more pronounced clipping:
Can Powerwall overcome solar inverter maximum output?

Do you ever feel the 3.8kW Inverter is a "negative limit" compared to 4.5 kW Production? Do you ever hit the limit of 3.8kW during the day which would mean you are limited by the size of the Inverter? You said your max production for 1 day is 27 kWh. So if a 8 "sun-hour" "late June" day that would mean an average of 3.375 kWh per hour? Do you see what I am asking? Maybe the limit of 3.8kW could happen but maybe only for 1 hour on the best day????? It just confusing why you would design in a limit unless it is really not a limit in reality????

I am putting in a 12.29kW system (Est. First Year Production = 20,095 kWh).
Tesla is installing 3.8kW + 7.6kW = 11.4kW inverters.

Tesla is saying that the 12.29kW is "DC" production and the 11.4kW is "AC" production which is what SCE is interested in. They say this is not a problem. This is normal. When I ask about using the 5.2 kW instead of the 3.8 kW or maybe 2x 6.6 kW she said they very seldom use those other sizes.

Other Delta Solar Inverters (from the document describing my inverters):
Transformerless (TL): 3.8 kW, 5.2 kW, 6.6 kW, 7.6 kW

My additional thoughts. Maybe I would not generate the FULL 12.29kW during the day. I.E. as the sun crosses the house your are getting optimal production on some panels but not all of them at the same time so the inverters do not need to be => FULL 12.29kW????

 

[Quickstart88]

I have a 3.8 kW system for a house occupied by two adults in San Diego North County, along the coast where it is frequently overcast. There are 15 300-watt panels (4.5 kW maximum production, limited of course by the 3.8 kW inverter). For aesthetic reasons, they are situated on a detached garage with a pitched roof, not optimally aligned, and there is some shading from trees. The daily average production for just over 3 years is almost exactly 15 kWh/day. The most I've ever generated in a day is 27 kWh (in late June) and the least is 1.6 kWh (on a Valentine's Day). My baseline mean daily consumption for lighting, computer/router/etc, TV, coffee maker, microwave, refrigerator, and other appliances is about 9-12 kWh/day. Air conditioning and a level 2 vehicle charger significantly increase consumption. I have had a PowerWall operational for two months and for all but a few days have not needed the grid. (That will likely change as we enter fall and winter.) Over 3+ years I have accumulated a ~$1700 net surplus balance on my SDGE bill thanks to over-production back to the grid and electric vehicle rebates. Hope this helps.

Hey ez123,

My situation is similar to yours. I am thinking of putting in a 3.8 kW system. Part of the new rental / purchase program Tesla just announced. I used about 20 to 22 kilowatt on average daily or 600 to 700 kilowatt per month. I am signed up for time of usage (TOU) rates are cheaper during super off peak.

Questions:
Is there any administrative cost per month for going with the solar 3.8 kilowatt system? I think this called some infrastructure green administrative charges of $20 or 25 bucks a month? Also did they upgrade your breaker panel to 200 amps?
The new solar rental or purchase looks to be a great deal. I am not sure if the cost included a new 200 breaker panel.

 

[SureValla]

Hey ez123,

My situation is similar to yours. I am thinking of putting in a 3.8 kW system. Part of the new rental / purchase program Tesla just announced. I used about 20 to 22 kilowatt on average daily or 600 to 700 kilowatt per month. I am signed up for time of usage (TOU) rates are cheaper during super off peak.

Questions:
Is there any administrative cost per month for going with the solar 3.8 kilowatt system? I think this called some infrastructure green administrative charges of $20 or 25 bucks a month? Also did they upgrade your breaker panel to 200 amps?
The new solar rental or purchase looks to be a great deal. I am not sure if the cost included a new 200 breaker panel.

any upgrades needed to install the solar array including upgrading an electrical panel are charged to the customer.

 

[Quickstart88]

any upgrades needed to install the solar array including upgrading an electrical panel are charged to the customer.

Does anyone know the extra cost to a new breaker panel?

 

[ez123]

I purchased mine outright. It was a non-Tesla installation.

My service was actually downgraded from 300 to 200 amps (not totally sure why that was needed).

You might be better off with a larger system, based on your usage. Mine is admittedly light.

Hey ez123,

My situation is similar to yours. I am thinking of putting in a 3.8 kW system. Part of the new rental / purchase program Tesla just announced. I used about 20 to 22 kilowatt on average daily or 600 to 700 kilowatt per month. I am signed up for time of usage (TOU) rates are cheaper during super off peak.

Questions:
Is there any administrative cost per month for going with the solar 3.8 kilowatt system? I think this called some infrastructure green administrative charges of $20 or 25 bucks a month? Also did they upgrade your breaker panel to 200 amps?
The new solar rental or purchase looks to be a great deal. I am not sure if the cost included a new 200 breaker panel.