Beverly Hills new EV Policy excludes hybrids

[bonnie]

"In order to improve access for vehicles that are 100% reliant on electric power, the new policy reserves the City’s EV charging stations for battery-only electric vehicles. All other vehicles (including plug-in hybrid electric vehicles) and any vehicle without an active charging session or not connected to a station may be subject to citation and/or towing at the owner’s expense."​

http://www.beverlyhills.org/cbhfile...901669426553/ElectricVehiclePolicyChanges.pdf

 

[nwdiver]

"In order to improve access for vehicles that are 100% reliant on electric power, the new policy reserves the City’s EV charging stations for battery-only electric vehicles. All other vehicles (including plug-in hybrid electric vehicles) and any vehicle without an active charging session or not connected to a station may be subject to citation and/or towing at the owner’s expense."​

http://www.beverlyhills.org/cbhfile...901669426553/ElectricVehiclePolicyChanges.pdf

??? That's kinda silly... why would you want to prevent a PHEV from charging?

 

[TexasEV]

So EVs can charge. Makes sense to me.

 

[MattMatt]

It also makes charging rather expensive. You have to pay the parking fee, a "station fee" of $6/hr after 2 hrs free, and $.25 per kwh.

 

[TexasEV]

It also makes charging rather expensive. You have to pay the parking fee, a "station fee" of $6/hr after 2 hrs free, and $.25 per kwh.

I think that means they're wanting to limit charging to 2 hours. Makes sense for a limited resource.

 

[DMack]

??? That's kinda silly... why would you want to prevent a PHEV from charging?

Because the landscape in changing, and with so many EVs on the road they need to make sure they don’t get squeezed out of charging by vehicles that can fall back on gas if the battery is drained.

 

[Lanny]

After viewing the Beverly Hills City Council presentation and discussion (July 5, 2016) and the Traffic & Parking Commission meeting (March 3, 2016), I found that the decision to prohibit PHEVs was made as an amendment right before voting by the chair of the Commission.

Here's his explanation.

 

[SMAlset]

Wow Bonnie that was really interesting to read. Thanks Lanny for the video link when Council was voting on Staff's recommendations. I do agree with their thinking behind this and even a bit surprised that they had the forethought to propose this back in 2016. Guess plenty of time to make PHEVs aware of the change.

Wonder if they ticket/tow ICE vehicles parked in EV parking spots?

 

[Lanny]

Wonder if they ticket/tow ICE vehicles parked in EV parking spots?

Yes, they plan to penalize any vehicle not plugged in and engaged in a charging session. They also plan to ticket and/or tow a PHEV even if it is charging.

 

[SageBrush]

Yes, they plan to penalize any vehicle not plugged in and engaged in a charging session. They also plan to ticket and/or tow a PHEV even if it is charging.

I sure am glad all the ticketing cops know the difference between an i3 BEV and an i3 REx

 

[nwdiver]

After viewing the Beverly Hills City Council presentation and discussion (July 5, 2016) and the Traffic & Parking Commission meeting (March 3, 2016), I found that the decision to prohibit PHEVs was made as an amendment right before voting by the chair of the Commission.

Here's his explanation.

The right question isn't 'Why are PHEVs charging'... it's 'Why are charging stations a limited resource'

 

[SageBrush]

What car does the guy who pushed the amendment drive ?

 

[SageBrush]

Because the landscape in changing, and with so many EVs on the road they need to make sure they don’t get squeezed out of charging by vehicles that can fall back on gas if the battery is drained.

The BEV landscape is quickly changing to vehicles that rarely if ever bother with public L2. I'll guess that is even more true in Beverly Hills. If PHEVs do not utilize L2 I think it will simply fall into neglect.

 

[nwdiver]

The landscape is quickly changing to BEVs that rarely if ever bother with L2. I'll guess that is even more true in Beverly Hills. If PHEVs do not utilize L2 I think it will simply fall into neglect.

Yep. My sister drives a Volt. Public L2 is WAY more useful for her than me.

 

[dgpcolorado]

The BEV landscape is quickly changing to vehicles that rarely if ever bother with public L2. I'll guess that is even more true in Beverly Hills. If PHEVs do not utilize L2 I think it will simply fall into neglect.

This. I think public charging will gravitate toward DCFC as short range EVs become an ever smaller percentage of the EV fleet and L2 pubic charge stations become irrelevant to most longer range EV owners. L2 charging is most useful for home, workplace, and destination charging — places where the car will be parked regularly for long periods of time. DCFC can be useful for quick charging to extend range beyond local driving.

 

[nwdiver]

This. I think public charging will gravitate toward DCFC as short range EVs become an ever smaller percentage of the EV fleet and L2 pubic charge stations become irrelevant to most longer range EV owners. L2 charging is most useful for home, workplace, and destination charging — places where the car will be parked regularly for long periods of time. DCFC can be useful for quick charging to extend range beyond local driving.

I dunno... the cost needs to come down A LOT for DCFC to become more common vs L2. Then there's the standardization problem. An i3 can't use CHADEMO. A LEAF can't use CCS and a Tesla can't use either w/o an adapter. L2 can be used by ALL EVs.

A single DCFC can easily cost ~$20k. You could install a bank of ~10 L2 for that cost; I'd rather see 10 L2 than 1 L3.

 

[dgpcolorado]

I dunno... the cost needs to come down A LOT for DCFC to become more common vs L2. Then there's the standardization problem. An i3 can't use CHADEMO. A LEAF can't use CCS and a Tesla can't use either w/o an adapter. L2 can be used by ALL EVs.

A single DCFC can easily cost ~$20k. You could install a bank of ~10 L2 for that cost; I'd rather see 10 L2 than 1 L3.

A 200+ mile range LEAF won't need public L2 charging for local driving any more than Teslas do now. L2 is too slow for long distance driving except for destination charging.

Ten years from now I expect 200 mile range EVs to be the bare minimum sold and short range EVs to be only a tiny fraction of the total.

We will have to wait and see how it all shakes out.

 

[SageBrush]

A 200+ mile range LEAF won't need public L2 charging for local driving any more than Teslas do now. L2 is too slow for long distance driving except for destination charging.

Ten years from now I expect 200 mile range EVs to be the bare minimum sold and short range EVs to be only a tiny fraction of the total.

That is my take as well, except I expect small batteries to continue to live on for a long time in PHEVs. Which makes the BH decision all the more confusing. If the Commish drives a an ICE hog I'm going to suspect this decision has ulterior motives.

 

[ZeApelido]

I once got a parking ticket in Beverly Hills (they are notoriously aggressive in giving citations I believe).

I drew a diagram of how I missed the No Parking (except a bajillion different permits) sign in MS Paint and mailed it to them, and they actually dismissed the ticket! My greatest victory.

Menlo Park, however, was not as gracious (red light ticket for my wife).

 

[Lanny]

The City of Beverly Hills has published an extensive FAQ on their new EV charging policy.

http://www.beverlyhills.org/cbhfiles/storage/files/3722299021337515507/EV_Policy_Rates_FAQ_2018.pdf