Baltimore County panel plan approved with conditions after production and visibility debate

The Baltimore County Landmarks Preservation Commission on a subsequent motion granted conditional approval for roof-mounted solar panels at the Perkins property, 403 Gunn Road, requiring that 19 panels proposed for the property’s southwest (front) roof slope be relocated to side or rear roof slopes or another on-site location and that updated plans be submitted to staff for final review.

Staff had recommended approval with a similar condition, citing Baltimore County Historic Design Guidelines (chapter 3, roofs; chapter 8, sustainability) and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, noting that panels on the southwest slope would negatively affect the landmark’s historic and architectural character even though much of the house is obscured from the public right-of-way by vegetation and topography. Staff’s analysis identified 45 proposed panels in total: 26 on a southeast slope and 19 on the southwest/front slope.

The applicant’s representative, Lucky, and homeowner Alan Perkins told the commission that moving the 19 panels to the rear or side would reduce system production by about 30% and substantially increase cost because of steep slopes, tree cover and the trenching and excavation required to run power to a ground- or accessory-mounted array. Alan Perkins described the goal as generating roughly 100–110% of household usage to allow future household growth.

Commissioners weighed two priorities: minimizing visual impact to the landmarked façade and allowing a viable solar system for the homeowner. After an initial motion to approve the plan as proposed failed (5 yes, 4 no; staff noted a seven-vote affirmative requirement), a follow-up motion to approve with the relocation condition passed on roll call. The motion was seconded and commissioners agreed the applicant could submit revised plans for staff review so the project might not need to return to the full commission.

The commission’s approval requires the applicant to submit updated drawings to staff showing the relocated panels and any aesthetic measures (trim or guards) to reduce visibility. Staff said it would follow up with the applicant the next day to coordinate final details.

The commission based its decision on county code and the commission’s design guidelines; the approval is a certificate of appropriateness conditioned on the revised plan and staff sign-off.