City gov and EV owners

[Anonymous]

The people doing this are selfish. I have seen several EV charging installations where the power has been run according to code under the sidewalk. The panel on the curb looks nice and the charging cord is long enough to reach a pretty broad area where the EV may be parked.

I also have seen two where the power crosses suspended over the sidewalk. I am not sure about the code with those two. But if they are running power simply laying on the sidewalk that is purely selfish. But then we also have people who simply refuse to shovel their sidewalks in the winter and are now refusing to get vaccines because...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've seen a few. At first I thought it was just something different. After having tripped over them a couple of times, I now accidentally kick them out

Good job! EV's should only be for suburban people that can afford to have a garage or carport.

I would start with: if you get an EV, you need to figure out a way to charge it without obstructing the sidewalk.

Yup. In DC, many, many people have parking spots and garages. buying an EV if you only have street parking seems like a real lack of forethought. Especially because most EVs are not particularly cheap and rarely available used, so the population we're talking about are not exactly hurting for cash.

Now, if EVs were more accessible to the broader population, I'd support installing charging stations on curbs to accommodate them. But as it currently stands, this would just be a convincing for people who are already extremely privileged. They can figure it out.

If the city had more widely available fast charging stations, this would be easier to pull off as a policy. But by effectively proposing that only people with off street parking can get EVs, you’re going to ensure that the underlying situation you identify — they’re mostly owned by rich people — continues. (You actually can find used Nissan Leafs or Chevy Bolts pretty easily, and they cost around $20,000 — not super cheap, obviously, but hardly out of reach for everyone.) The solution to EV cables blocking sidewalks is better EV infrastructure, not fewer EVs.

Unless you are willing to put up the capital to invest in charging stations in an area with extremely high real estate prices then I suggest what you are proposing is not realistic. Just as it is not the governments responsibility to build gas stations, it is not the gocernments responsibility to build EV infrastructure. However, it is the governments job to protect residents from nuisance on public right of ways. If you want better charging infrastructure, you would be better served petitioning Tesla or property developers. In the mean time people need to keep their cords off the sidewalk.

[Anonymous]

DC has some of the most punitive public streetside EV charging regulations in the country. It was hoped that they would be tossed before they went into law, but the pandemic sideswiped that.

In addition to whatever prices the vendor sets, the regulation requires a minimum $1 per hour charging fee and $10 per hour fee while not charging. It is unclear whether these fees are returned to the city, or kept by the vendor. (2406.29(e))
If you’re plugged in for over four hours during the day between 9 a.m. and 8 p.m., you’re fined $30, even if you’re still charging. Applies every day of the year. (2406.29(e) and (2406.14(b-c))
If any car is parked without being plugged in, a $100 fine is assessed. (2406.29(a) and 2406.14(b-c))
The DC EV charging law is very strict on allocating eligible on-street parking spots:

Blocks with Residential Permit Parking (RPP) are ineligible. In DC, virtually every neighborhood in the city uses the RPP system. (See PDF map.) The exception is mainly the central business district (CBD), which is metered, and the least dense, outer suburban neighborhoods. RPP blocks are not metered, and while the parking is available to anyone, vehicles without RPP permits can only park for two hours at a time. (2406.22(c))
Blocks with rush-hour parking restrictions and snow emergency restrictions are ineligible. This limits potential spots in the District’s CBD. (2406.22(b))
No more than two spots per block can be designated for EV charging. (2406.23).
For every two charging stations installed in the CBD by a vendor, the vendor must install seven stations, each serving at least two spaces, outside the CBD. A vendor’s permit application for a 15th station won’t be approved until they have charging stations in each ward.

One neighborhood highlights the difference between utility-regulated curbside charging and private vendors
Takoma Park, Maryland, sits on both sides of the DC-Maryland border. It was developed this way. Both the DC and MD residents of this neighborhood are served by the same utility (Pepco) and the same public transit system (WMATA). But in Maryland, the utility regulator authorized Pepco to offer Level 2 EV charging for $0.18 per kWh on public rights-of-way, with that price controlled like any other electric tariff. Takoma Park has four of these public Level 2 chargers.

No matter what car — BEV or PHEV — you drive, when you plug in to the Pepco chargers on the Maryland side, you know you’re paying $0.18 per kWh.

District residents likely to pay $2.50 per hour for charging, pricing out charging for many
Residents of Takoma on the DC side of the border are likely to pay a minimum of $2.50 per hour under the proposed regulation. That assumption takes EVgo’s flat $1.50/hr for L2 charging, and adds the District’s $1/hr fee, assuming EVgo is required to remit that fee to the District.

When you consider that the majority of PHEVs can take only 3.3-3.6 kW of charging, that means they’ll be paying roughly $0.80 per kWh. This applies to a lot of BEVs as well, like the Nissan Leaf S trim up to 2018. Paying this much is equivalent to paying $10 per gallon for gasoline.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've seen a few. At first I thought it was just something different. After having tripped over them a couple of times, I now accidentally kick them out

Good job! EV's should only be for suburban people that can afford to have a garage or carport.

I would start with: if you get an EV, you need to figure out a way to charge it without obstructing the sidewalk.

Yup. In DC, many, many people have parking spots and garages. buying an EV if you only have street parking seems like a real lack of forethought. Especially because most EVs are not particularly cheap and rarely available used, so the population we're talking about are not exactly hurting for cash.

Now, if EVs were more accessible to the broader population, I'd support installing charging stations on curbs to accommodate them. But as it currently stands, this would just be a convincing for people who are already extremely privileged. They can figure it out.

If the city had more widely available fast charging stations, this would be easier to pull off as a policy. But by effectively proposing that only people with off street parking can get EVs, you’re going to ensure that the underlying situation you identify — they’re mostly owned by rich people — continues. (You actually can find used Nissan Leafs or Chevy Bolts pretty easily, and they cost around $20,000 — not super cheap, obviously, but hardly out of reach for everyone.) The solution to EV cables blocking sidewalks is better EV infrastructure, not fewer EVs.

Unless you are willing to put up the capital to invest in charging stations in an area with extremely high real estate prices then I suggest what you are proposing is not realistic. Just as it is not the governments responsibility to build gas stations, it is not the gocernments responsibility to build EV infrastructure. However, it is the governments job to protect residents from nuisance on public right of ways. If you want better charging infrastructure, you would be better served petitioning Tesla or property developers. In the mean time people need to keep their cords off the sidewalk.

It's not the government's responsibility to provide charging stations, true, but it could get involved in incentivizing them, which it already does do for private owners. (I'll get a tax credit for the charging setup I installed for my EV, which we park in our driveway.) Or it could require private developers to put them in if they want permission to build. Electrify America, which is a Volkswagen spinoff, put chargers in the Walmart parking lot on Georgia Avenue -- that's the kind of thing that would help make it feasible to own an EV (which benefits all of us who breathe, since they don't emit anything while driving) without obstructing sidewalks (which also benefits us all, for obvious reasons).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've seen a few. At first I thought it was just something different. After having tripped over them a couple of times, I now accidentally kick them out

Good job! EV's should only be for suburban people that can afford to have a garage or carport.

I would start with: if you get an EV, you need to figure out a way to charge it without obstructing the sidewalk.

Yup. In DC, many, many people have parking spots and garages. buying an EV if you only have street parking seems like a real lack of forethought. Especially because most EVs are not particularly cheap and rarely available used, so the population we're talking about are not exactly hurting for cash.

Now, if EVs were more accessible to the broader population, I'd support installing charging stations on curbs to accommodate them. But as it currently stands, this would just be a convincing for people who are already extremely privileged. They can figure it out.

If the city had more widely available fast charging stations, this would be easier to pull off as a policy. But by effectively proposing that only people with off street parking can get EVs, you’re going to ensure that the underlying situation you identify — they’re mostly owned by rich people — continues. (You actually can find used Nissan Leafs or Chevy Bolts pretty easily, and they cost around $20,000 — not super cheap, obviously, but hardly out of reach for everyone.) The solution to EV cables blocking sidewalks is better EV infrastructure, not fewer EVs.

Unless you are willing to put up the capital to invest in charging stations in an area with extremely high real estate prices then I suggest what you are proposing is not realistic. Just as it is not the governments responsibility to build gas stations, it is not the gocernments responsibility to build EV infrastructure. However, it is the governments job to protect residents from nuisance on public right of ways. If you want better charging infrastructure, you would be better served petitioning Tesla or property developers. In the mean time people need to keep their cords off the sidewalk.

It's not the government's responsibility to provide charging stations, true, but it could get involved in incentivizing them, which it already does do for private owners. (I'll get a tax credit for the charging setup I installed for my EV, which we park in our driveway.) Or it could require private developers to put them in if they want permission to build. Electrify America, which is a Volkswagen spinoff, put chargers in the Walmart parking lot on Georgia Avenue -- that's the kind of thing that would help make it feasible to own an EV (which benefits all of us who breathe, since they don't emit anything while driving) without obstructing sidewalks (which also benefits us all, for obvious reasons).

I don’t care what your excuses are. Stop making a nuisance for everyone else, especially the elderly and disabled.

[Anonymous]

DC views EV's as a privileged nuisance. They do not see EV's as a way forward through greener or more efficient transportation but an impediment to ultimately a car free city.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DC views EV's as a privileged nuisance. They do not see EV's as a way forward through greener or more efficient transportation but an impediment to ultimately a car free city.

They're not, or at least they're certainly not more space-efficient.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC views EV's as a privileged nuisance. They do not see EV's as a way forward through greener or more efficient transportation but an impediment to ultimately a car free city.

They're not, or at least they're certainly not more space-efficient.

Larger interior cars for same outside space equals more efficient.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've seen a few. At first I thought it was just something different. After having tripped over them a couple of times, I now accidentally kick them out

Good job! EV's should only be for suburban people that can afford to have a garage or carport.

I would start with: if you get an EV, you need to figure out a way to charge it without obstructing the sidewalk.

Yup. In DC, many, many people have parking spots and garages. buying an EV if you only have street parking seems like a real lack of forethought. Especially because most EVs are not particularly cheap and rarely available used, so the population we're talking about are not exactly hurting for cash.

Now, if EVs were more accessible to the broader population, I'd support installing charging stations on curbs to accommodate them. But as it currently stands, this would just be a convincing for people who are already extremely privileged. They can figure it out.

If the city had more widely available fast charging stations, this would be easier to pull off as a policy. But by effectively proposing that only people with off street parking can get EVs, you’re going to ensure that the underlying situation you identify — they’re mostly owned by rich people — continues. (You actually can find used Nissan Leafs or Chevy Bolts pretty easily, and they cost around $20,000 — not super cheap, obviously, but hardly out of reach for everyone.) The solution to EV cables blocking sidewalks is better EV infrastructure, not fewer EVs.

Unless you are willing to put up the capital to invest in charging stations in an area with extremely high real estate prices then I suggest what you are proposing is not realistic. Just as it is not the governments responsibility to build gas stations, it is not the gocernments responsibility to build EV infrastructure. However, it is the governments job to protect residents from nuisance on public right of ways. If you want better charging infrastructure, you would be better served petitioning Tesla or property developers. In the mean time people need to keep their cords off the sidewalk.

It's not the government's responsibility to provide charging stations, true, but it could get involved in incentivizing them, which it already does do for private owners. (I'll get a tax credit for the charging setup I installed for my EV, which we park in our driveway.) Or it could require private developers to put them in if they want permission to build. Electrify America, which is a Volkswagen spinoff, put chargers in the Walmart parking lot on Georgia Avenue -- that's the kind of thing that would help make it feasible to own an EV (which benefits all of us who breathe, since they don't emit anything while driving) without obstructing sidewalks (which also benefits us all, for obvious reasons).

I don’t care what your excuses are. Stop making a nuisance for everyone else, especially the elderly and disabled.

I literally said I park and charge my EV in my driveway, which means it’s only a nuisance for me and my family, and also that the city should work to make it easier for people to charge without needing to run cables across the sidewalk. What excuses are you talking about?

[Anonymous]

There is a very strong anti EV crowd in DC. When I bought mine I was expecting grief from the "rolling coal" crowd, but I have not seen any of that, simply condemnation from the "ban cars" crowd. Far more so than I used to personally witness when I road a gas car. I think that the bike/car banning crowd, saw a city with no cars in their reaches and now are seeing this popularizing of EV's. The easiest way to fight that is to make them as difficult as possible to own and make their ownership seen as some sort of equality denial indicator.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is a very strong anti EV crowd in DC. When I bought mine I was expecting grief from the "rolling coal" crowd, but I have not seen any of that, simply condemnation from the "ban cars" crowd. Far more so than I used to personally witness when I road a gas car. I think that the bike/car banning crowd, saw a city with no cars in their reaches and now are seeing this popularizing of EV's. The easiest way to fight that is to make them as difficult as possible to own and make their ownership seen as some sort of equality denial indicator.

Could you please provide some examples of the "condemnation" you have received from this "crowd"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC views EV's as a privileged nuisance. They do not see EV's as a way forward through greener or more efficient transportation but an impediment to ultimately a car free city.

They're not, or at least they're certainly not more space-efficient.

Larger interior cars for same outside space equals more efficient.

They occupy the same amount of space. As you say. If everyone swapped out their gas-powered SUV for an electric golf cart, it would be different.

[Anonymous]

In the DC Metro area, having an electric car is better for the environment than gas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is a very strong anti EV crowd in DC. When I bought mine I was expecting grief from the "rolling coal" crowd, but I have not seen any of that, simply condemnation from the "ban cars" crowd. Far more so than I used to personally witness when I road a gas car. I think that the bike/car banning crowd, saw a city with no cars in their reaches and now are seeing this popularizing of EV's. The easiest way to fight that is to make them as difficult as possible to own and make their ownership seen as some sort of equality denial indicator.

I think you’re overestimating the number of people in D.C. who want to ban cars and also the extent to which they thought that goal was actually achievable. It is true that some people working in this space think EVs are just a bandaid on the underlying problem of a society that’s organized to be too car-centric (a sentiment which I agree with to some extent, which is why I try to walk, bike, or take public transit rather than driving even an electric car when I can). But most policy makers and advocates would rather have electric cars than gas-powered ones, even as they also want to make it easier and more convenient to get around without any cars at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a very strong anti EV crowd in DC. When I bought mine I was expecting grief from the "rolling coal" crowd, but I have not seen any of that, simply condemnation from the "ban cars" crowd. Far more so than I used to personally witness when I road a gas car. I think that the bike/car banning crowd, saw a city with no cars in their reaches and now are seeing this popularizing of EV's. The easiest way to fight that is to make them as difficult as possible to own and make their ownership seen as some sort of equality denial indicator.

I think you’re overestimating the number of people in D.C. who want to ban cars and also the extent to which they thought that goal was actually achievable. It is true that some people working in this space think EVs are just a bandaid on the underlying problem of a society that’s organized to be too car-centric (a sentiment which I agree with to some extent, which is why I try to walk, bike, or take public transit rather than driving even an electric car when I can). But most policy makers and advocates would rather have electric cars than gas-powered ones, even as they also want to make it easier and more convenient to get around without any cars at all.

Not to mention that #BanCars doesn't literally mean: ban cars. It means: greatly reduce the car-centricity of our land use and transportation system, especially in cities.

I think that are definitely people who believe that switching from internal-combustion-engine cars to electric cars will solve all car-related problems, and it won't. The only car-related problem it will solve is tailpipe emissions. It will also reduce carbon emissions, if the electricity for charging the cars comes from renewable sources. All of the other problems - parking, roads, traffic, sprawl, a car-dependent lifestyle, serious injuries and deaths - will still be there.