STATEN ISLAND, N.Y. -- Want to add a family room to your home or build your dream house? There’s a good chance you’ll have to factor in the cost of solar panels for your roof, thanks to a new city law aimed at creating a “greener" city.

Local laws 92 and 94 took effect in November, mandating that any roof undergoing major construction be covered in either solar photovoltaic (PV) panels or a green roof system (covered in vegetation). Construction projects affected include new construction, vertical and horizontal extensions, and major modifications to the roof requiring a permit.

Proponents of the laws, including City Councilwoman Debi Rose (D-North Shore), who voted in favor of the bills back in spring 2019, say solar panels play a significant role in moving the city away from a carbon-focused energy and toward renewable energy sources.

Councilmen Joseph Borelli (R-South Shore) and Council Minority Leader Steven Matteo (R-Mid Island) voted against the bills, which were sponsored by Council members from Brooklyn and Queens.

‘INNOVATIVE ACTION’

“Climate change, air pollution and rising energy costs are realities that affect the most vulnerable of our world, including hundreds of thousands of New York City residents,’’ Rose said. “Addressing this climate emergency requires us to take decisive, innovative action to reduce our carbon emissions.”

Buildings make up more than 70% of greenhouse gas emissions in NYC, the City Council points out in its Climate Mobilization Act, which includes the laws 92 and 94. Energy consumption from electricity use, heating, and cooling all contribute to greenhouse gas emissions, science has shown.

But the new “green’’ legislation has residents and those in the Staten Island building community seeing red.

The mandate places an unfair financial burden of at least $15,000 to $20,000 on those who are building and buying new homes, they say, and it especially hurts those putting additions on their homes.

NO CONSIDERATION FOR ‘REGULAR PEOPLE’

“There hasn’t been any consideration for the regular people,’’ said Alan Becker, a senior officer and past president of the Building Industry Association of New York, a Staten Island-based organization of builders.

The cost of the solar panel system to many new homebuyers, or those making additions to their homes, won’t be offset by the energy cost savings, he said, and it is wrong to make home buyers pay for a system that they may personally find unattractive or even dangerous.

“Some think it causes cancer,’’ he said. “How does the government force that upon me, the developer? It’s really one of the worst things they’ve ever done.’’

Rose said the bills were part of a package that paves the way for a cooler, greener future by using rooftops as a resource to reduce the negative impact of new development.

This house at 70 Manor Rd. is fit with solar panels. (Staten Island Advance/Jan Somma-Hammel)

Yet, Islanders seeking to add space to their existing homes will be particularly hard hit, said Ronald Victorio, a West Brighton architect, who added that many of his clients have chosen to walk away from renovation projects because of the solar panel requirement.

ONE HOMEOWNER’S STORY

Conor Farrell is just such a client.

He was looking forward to adding 12 feet to the back of the 1930 West Brighton Colonial he bought with his wife, Charlene, in September 2019. But when told by Victorio that the square footage he was adding forced him to comply with the solar panel law, he backed out, Farrell said.

“We figured we’d expand the house and it fit into our budget,’’ Farrell said. “But I never considered solar panels. We knew it would cost $30,000 or $40,000, and I didn’t have that to spend on something I didn’t need or want. But, even if I had an extra $50,000, I still wouldn’t have done it.’’

When it comes to new construction, Staten Island homes don’t fit the typical New York City profile with expansive, flat roofs that are more ideal for vegetative green roof systems, Island opponents of the law say.

Though the law provides exemptions for certain homes, like those with very steep roofs and those that aren’t structured to create the required 4 kilowatts of energy, it’ll cost builders and residents money to research that, and the required paperwork will delay their projects, said Victorio.

“The exclusions must be calculated by the architect or engineer and submitted to the DOB (Department of Buildings) on a premise-by-premise basis,’’ he said, noting that his office hasn’t processed any such requests yet. “It will require additional cost to determine the feasibility.’’

And many older homes aren’t structurally designed to support a solar panel system -- even if the homeowner wants one, said Frank Martarella III, president of the Staten Island chapter of the American Institute of Architects, which has issued a statement opposing the new laws.

“All that stuff now has to be considered at the beginning of the project,’’ he said. “The burden falls on me to run the calculations and determine if you have enough area. I have to determine if enough solar power can be achieved and if the answer is yes, they have to be installed.’’

Martarella said his peers are also angry that the city informed them of the new law just 21 days before it took effect. “It was sprung on us,’’ he said. “We were not even contacted or consulted.’’

Though opponents all said they see the environmental value of solar panels, (Becker even said he has them on his own home), they all question the fairness of a mandate.

NOT A ‘CURE-ALL’

“To just place that burden on the homeowner when it might not be in their best interest is just the wrong policy,’’ said Borelli, who served on the state Assembly’s Energy Committee when he was in the state legislature. “I am totally in favor of putting solar panels on public buildings. We have school buildings with large, open flat roofs where it makes a lot of sense. But it just doesn’t always make sense. It’s not a cure-all.’’

Matteo and Borelli both said incentives for residents would have been more fair.

“Rather than imposing costly mandates, government should be providing owners more incentives, like tax abatements and rebates, to make their buildings more energy-efficient,” Matteo said.

Victorio said he agrees, adding that the move will hurt the Island economy, as many more residents will consider leaving the borough for New Jersey when their desired home becomes unaffordable here.

“The part that is frustrating is the mandate,’’ he said. “It shouldn’t be mandatory because of the financial burden. It should be something they choose to do."