4 ms·

Meanwhile in CA. I'm building a home and pretty much locked into a specific bank for this stupid deal. Yesterday I called my banker and said: "I'm spending abou

Meanwhile in CA. I'm building a home and pretty much locked into a specific bank for this stupid deal. Yesterday I called my banker and said: "I'm spending about $9K to get hooked up to PG&E, can I redirect that money to make this a 100% off grid solar house"? The answer was NO and it's all tied to Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, bla bla bla and I hope in the future it changes. He was also refusing to allow me to put Solar anywhere that the appraiser sees. The laws right now are designed to burn California down (and make people homeless but that's a completely separate thing)

HenryKissinger 5y ago
Worst case scenario: what would happen if you went ahead anyway?
- jweir 5y ago
  Better to ask forgiveness than permission.
  - asdfasgasdgasdg 5y ago
    There are cases where this isn't true, and this is one of those cases.
- jhayward 5y ago
  City or County denies occupancy certificate due to no electric connection and he's on the hook for all the mortgage, plus liable for the bank's losses because the house is un-sellable plus he has to find somewhere else to live until it is corrected.
  - rhacker 5y ago
    The county itself is OK with that as long as I would have the power source permitted. It's the bank in my case.
- djrogers 5y ago
  He wouldn’t have a mortgage (at least not though Freddie Mac / Fannie Mae)
colincooke 5y ago
While I disagree with the appraisal portion, not hooking up to the grid is understandable. While you may be prepared and willing to live off-grid, future home owners may see that as a downside (perceived/actual unreliability, maintenance costs, requirement of specialized knowledge), so it would make sense that it would effect your home price (hence the conditions of your mortage).
JKCalhoun 5y ago
Is this a bank issue? If you were paying out of pocket it sounds like you could do what you want.
- rhacker 5y ago
  I can't afford it. :(
- reedjosh 5y ago
  But finance is all but entirely necessary when the government both provides cheap loans and encourages currency debasement. With inflation it's almost irresponsible to purchase a home outright when a conforming loan will essentially supercharge the growth rate of the home as an asset. I originally paid extra on my mortgage. A few years later, and my mortgage (which wasn't even conforming) costs less than rent for a three bed apartment. I see now that there are better places to put the extra cash. All of these programs are nudging strategies that don't really affect the wealthy in society. Meanwhile I pretty much have to get a loan for school and housing.
thepasswordis 5y ago
The laws in California are built on the idea that you can centrally plan a functioning society. You can’t. It’s frustrating that we have to KEEP learning this over and over and over.
- jeffbee 5y ago
  No? What does some bank construction loan oversight have to do with “central planning”?
  - thepasswordis 5y ago
    The regulations come from Fannie and Freddie as the poster said. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fannie_Mae https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fannie_Mae The other concern is that a centrally planned regulation about being connected to grid power prevents them from doing solar. These are both regulations made FAR from where the OP is building their house, and OP is simply caught in the regulations as an edge case. But because these things are centrally planned there is no recourse.
    - jeffbee 5y ago
      Neither of those is a "regulation" at all. Fannie won't buy mortgages on off-the-grid properties, because they are a weird and frankly pointless niche and a vanishingly small slice of the housing market that nobody cares about. To build one on credit you need a portfolio loan from a cooperative lender. Obviously, if you try to get a construction loan that the lender thinks can be resold as a traditional mortgage, but then try to build a non-traditional building with the money, there's going to get differences between you and your lender.
    - djrogers 5y ago
      > centrally planned regulation about being connected to grid power prevents them from doing solar. This is not correct at all. Solar is not only possible for grid connected new construction in CA, it’s required. The only restriction here is the federal one that requires his new construction home to be grid tied if Fannie Mae is going to loan him $$ for it. Given the potential negative impact on home value of a non-grid-tied home, that’s probably reasonable.
Reason077 5y ago
Huh? I was under the impression that, since 2020, solar is mandatory on new residential buildings under 3 stories in California. Is that not the case? http://www.calsolarinc.com/solar-requirements-for-commercial-and-residential-development-in-california/ http://www.calsolarinc.com/solar-requirements-for-commercial...
- asdff 5y ago
  I've seen a few single family homes go up quick and finish in empty lots in my neighborhood in CA this summer and none have had solar panels. Not sure how much teeth this law has or if other issues preclude it like if these homes I saw were permitted earlier and grandfathered in.
  - jeffbee 5y ago
    On my block they actually demolished a rooftop solar and rebuilt the house twice as large, all natural gas heating and appliances. This is in Berkeley, and it's possible because all of the energy efficiency requirements at local and state level exempt reconstruction, as long as you keep I guess 1 board from the old structure it works.
    - asdff 5y ago
      I see a lot of that sort of development too. Old rotting 2br bungalow converted to a three story home that consumes almost all available space on the lot and looks like a modern refrigerator. I'm not sure why that is allowed but a three story apartment complex of the same exact dimensions is illegal.

HenryKissinger 5y ago

Worst case scenario: what would happen if you went ahead anyway?

jweir 5y ago
Better to ask forgiveness than permission.
- asdfasgasdgasdg 5y ago
  There are cases where this isn't true, and this is one of those cases.
jhayward 5y ago
City or County denies occupancy certificate due to no electric connection and he's on the hook for all the mortgage, plus liable for the bank's losses because the house is un-sellable plus he has to find somewhere else to live until it is corrected.
- rhacker 5y ago
  The county itself is OK with that as long as I would have the power source permitted. It's the bank in my case.
djrogers 5y ago
He wouldn’t have a mortgage (at least not though Freddie Mac / Fannie Mae)

colincooke 5y ago

While I disagree with the appraisal portion, not hooking up to the grid is understandable. While you may be prepared and willing to live off-grid, future home owners may see that as a downside (perceived/actual unreliability, maintenance costs, requirement of specialized knowledge), so it would make sense that it would effect your home price (hence the conditions of your mortage).

JKCalhoun 5y ago

Is this a bank issue? If you were paying out of pocket it sounds like you could do what you want.

rhacker 5y ago
I can't afford it. :(
reedjosh 5y ago
But finance is all but entirely necessary when the government both provides cheap loans and encourages currency debasement. With inflation it's almost irresponsible to purchase a home outright when a conforming loan will essentially supercharge the growth rate of the home as an asset. I originally paid extra on my mortgage. A few years later, and my mortgage (which wasn't even conforming) costs less than rent for a three bed apartment. I see now that there are better places to put the extra cash. All of these programs are nudging strategies that don't really affect the wealthy in society. Meanwhile I pretty much have to get a loan for school and housing.

thepasswordis 5y ago

The laws in California are built on the idea that you can centrally plan a functioning society. You can’t. It’s frustrating that we have to KEEP learning this over and over and over.

jeffbee 5y ago
No? What does some bank construction loan oversight have to do with “central planning”?
- thepasswordis 5y ago
  The regulations come from Fannie and Freddie as the poster said. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fannie_Mae https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fannie_Mae The other concern is that a centrally planned regulation about being connected to grid power prevents them from doing solar. These are both regulations made FAR from where the OP is building their house, and OP is simply caught in the regulations as an edge case. But because these things are centrally planned there is no recourse.
  - jeffbee 5y ago
    Neither of those is a "regulation" at all. Fannie won't buy mortgages on off-the-grid properties, because they are a weird and frankly pointless niche and a vanishingly small slice of the housing market that nobody cares about. To build one on credit you need a portfolio loan from a cooperative lender. Obviously, if you try to get a construction loan that the lender thinks can be resold as a traditional mortgage, but then try to build a non-traditional building with the money, there's going to get differences between you and your lender.
  - djrogers 5y ago
    > centrally planned regulation about being connected to grid power prevents them from doing solar. This is not correct at all. Solar is not only possible for grid connected new construction in CA, it’s required. The only restriction here is the federal one that requires his new construction home to be grid tied if Fannie Mae is going to loan him $$ for it. Given the potential negative impact on home value of a non-grid-tied home, that’s probably reasonable.

Reason077 5y ago

Huh? I was under the impression that, since 2020, solar is mandatory on new residential buildings under 3 stories in California. Is that not the case? http://www.calsolarinc.com/solar-requirements-for-commercial-and-residential-development-in-california/ http://www.calsolarinc.com/solar-requirements-for-commercial...

asdff 5y ago
I've seen a few single family homes go up quick and finish in empty lots in my neighborhood in CA this summer and none have had solar panels. Not sure how much teeth this law has or if other issues preclude it like if these homes I saw were permitted earlier and grandfathered in.
- jeffbee 5y ago
  On my block they actually demolished a rooftop solar and rebuilt the house twice as large, all natural gas heating and appliances. This is in Berkeley, and it's possible because all of the energy efficiency requirements at local and state level exempt reconstruction, as long as you keep I guess 1 board from the old structure it works.
  - asdff 5y ago
    I see a lot of that sort of development too. Old rotting 2br bungalow converted to a three story home that consumes almost all available space on the lot and looks like a modern refrigerator. I'm not sure why that is allowed but a three story apartment complex of the same exact dimensions is illegal.