Supercharger - Fountain Valley (LIVE 28 Aug 2015, Expanded 27 Oct 2017, 16 stalls)

[bollar]

The rumor is some people are opposed to releasing more parking spaces for charging stations. (Similar to Culver City's limit.).

This is a common problem at shopping centers. Existing tenants have contracts with the property management company outlining how many spaces are available to them. Any change in the number of spaces gives them a negotiating point for better lease rates. Perhaps the problem will go away with a little $.

 

[jgrgnt]

Just sent this to the Tesla Owners Club of Orange County membership.

"Stumbled upon a hearing in Fountain Valley Planning Committee for this Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 6pm.

There are rumors that this permit to expand the supercharger might be in jeopardy and can use the support of some Tesla Owners (especially those that live and vote in Fountain Valley) so that Tesla can expand the supercharger stalls from eight to sixteen. We're looking for QUIET support of the measure for Tesla and think that wearing Tesla logo items and attendance of the hearing with such support may sway the council.

The hearing will be held at 10200 Slater Avenue, Fountain Valley, CA at 6pm.

If interested in reading the Agenda from the FV Planning Commission Agenda, click here. (Note that this is a link to a PDF of the Agenda from FV Planning Commission.)"

If interested in joining the Tesla Owners Club of Orange County for this effort, OR for others, PM me here or send an email. (Here's a link to the Official Tesla Owners Club site on Tesla.com)

The agenda is an interesting read. It mentions that two of the five property owners (Ross/Dollar Tree and The Shops) are strongly opposed to the Supercharger expansion due to parking congestion concerns.

 

[brucet999]

The agenda is an interesting read. It mentions that two of the five property owners (Ross/Dollar Tree and The Shops) are strongly opposed to the Supercharger expansion due to parking congestion concerns.

Interesting, since neither of those is anywhere near the Super Chargers. I don't know where "The Shops" is, but Dollar Tree is at the extreme opposite corner of that huge parking lot, at least 260 yards away. There is no way that any of its shoppers would need to park there.

 

[AEdennis]

Interesting, since neither of those is anywhere near the Super Chargers. I don't know where "The Shops" is, but Dollar Tree is at the extreme opposite corner of that huge parking lot, at least 260 yards away. There is no way that any of its shoppers would need to park there.

I think the Shops is where Starbucks is, and Dollar Tree is at the extreme end of the parking lot.

 

[thecloud]

Interesting, since neither of those is anywhere near the Super Chargers. I don't know where "The Shops" is, but Dollar Tree is at the extreme opposite corner of that huge parking lot, at least 260 yards away. There is no way that any of its shoppers would need to park there.

It sounded like they were upset about the fact that PetSmart employees were told to park over by those businesses instead of next to PetSmart where the superchargers are.

 

[bollar]

The agenda is an interesting read. It mentions that two of the five property owners (Ross/Dollar Tree and The Shops) are strongly opposed to the Supercharger expansion due to parking congestion concerns.

Well there you have it. Ross would like compensation for "losing" the parking spaces. The actual Supercharger location is irrelevant if it's in the same parking lot mentioned in their lease.

 

[TaoJones]

Is there a recommended email address to which comment may be sent prior to the FV meeting on the 12th?

Putting SCs at shopping centers continues to be a poor idea, and there is no better example of why than FV.

However, since it's there now, it might as well be sized to handle the load both present and future. Otherwise, it's just another problem location with no solution.

My support for expansion of this problem site in no way diminishes the need for an SC in North (San Diego) County, which indirectly would relieve some of the pressure upon SJC and even FV and for sure QC/SD.

Anyway, I'd be happy to encourage the council/commission/committee to do the right thing. After all - more spaces means more Teslas which means more business for the surrounding merchants. At least that's the premise that management likes to repeat, and since last I checked, parking at shopping centers was for people who SHOP, it all sounds like a win win to me. *eye roll*

Just look at how many SC users walk over to Costco to do their shopping - returning many minutes late and blithely accruing their idle fees.

 

[ReddyLeaf]

Interesting, since neither of those is anywhere near the Super Chargers. I don't know where "The Shops" is, but Dollar Tree is at the extreme opposite corner of that huge parking lot, at least 260 yards away. There is no way that any of its shoppers would need to park there.

My guess: the owners of these stores don't think Tesla owners are their target demographic.

 

[brucet999]

Just look at how many SC users walk over to Costco to do their shopping - returning many minutes late and blithely accruing their idle fees.

Unfortunately, many of the FV users are locals, some of whom don't patronize the stores. I remember being puzzled one day to find three Teslas parked waiting for an open station and a Toyota with engine running and driver just sitting there. Soon a station opened up, an X backed in, the driver plugged in, and then she got into her (presumably) husband's Toyota and they drove away.

 

[MP3Mike]

My guess: the owners of these stores don't think Tesla owners are their target demographic.

If you read the actual complaints you see that it is not the stores themselves, but the property owners that lease to the stores that complained. Of course I don't know if the stores complained to the owners...

 

[Economite]

The issue is that there are five separate owners of the overall complex. Employees are supposed to park on the land owned by the owner of their employer's building; the central lots are reserved for customers. The owner of the PetSmart building is trying to sell/give a substantial number of his 'owned' spaces to Tesla; tying up spaces that would otherwise be available to PetSmart employees. He, through Tesla's planners, is claiming that this will work (and not tie up the central customer lot) because the PetSmart employees will park on owned spaces of the other for property owners. The other property owners don't want the PetSmart employees shifting to their "owned" spaces since the PetSmart building owner has an obligation to accommodate these employees.

Ultimately, if the PetSmart building owner wants to lease some of his "owned" spaces to Tesla, he'll probably need to buy the right to do so from the other owners. This makes sense to me.

 

[RandyS]

I could have missed it, but I scanned down the pdf agenda packet and looked at Tesla's drawings, and I don't see any mention of a larger utility electrical service or larger switchgear to feed this expanded setup. I hope they're not installing more spaces and planning to reduce the power to each supercharger (pair of spaces) to accommodate the expansion....Maybe the expanded utility service is just not part of the packet in the agenda...

 

[cpa]

Here is the web page for the landlord/owner of Dollar Tree:

Schiffman Enterprises - Home Page

 

[hill]

The rumor is some people are opposed to releasing more parking spaces for charging stations. (Similar to Culver City's limit.).

Here's another rumor - doubling the existing stalls means a much larger transformer install. Cost of permits / parts / labor may very well get passed on to the leasing company & then to the shops .
.

 

[MP3Mike]

Cost of permits / parts / labor may very well get passed on to the leasing company & then to the shops .

I highly doubt it, the transformer, etc. are normally dedicated to Tesla, and I'm sure Tesla deals directly with the power company. It is also possible that Tesla paid the power company to have a big enough transformer installed in the first place so that they didn't need to involve the power company a second time when they expand.

 

[Lotsadriving]

I believe the construction photos from page 3 of this discussion show the transformer installation at the same time as the Tesla station construction.

Perhaps the Southern California Edison documents on electrical service requirements, compared with these photos can shed some light on future capacity?
Electrical Service Requirements (ESR) | SCE Manuals | Regulatory Information | Home - SCE

http://www.sce.com/nrc/aboutsce/regulatory/distributionmanuals/esr.pdf

The supercharger cabinets at the Fremont factory location indicated 3 phase, 480 VAC input. Wonder if someone can get a close up of the power label on a newer cabinet, say in Burbank?
Supercharger - Burbank Mall (Under construction, appears to be 20 stalls)

 

[AEdennis]

Ok.

We had ten owners show up to the hearing and three spoke up to give the commission a piece of their mind.

The commission approved further study of this proposal with a potential vote next month. Two of the six commission members were not in attendance. Of those that were in attendance one was originally against the proposal, but later flipped. So, all four were in support of further study with one ready to approve and two only going as far as sending it to study with one leaning to approve.

More later. The parking issues at the center apparently has been going on for a while, even before Tesla got there.

Stay tuned.

 

[Economite]

Ok.

We had ten owners show up to the hearing and three spoke up to give the commission a piece of their mind.

The commission approved further study of this proposal with a potential vote next month. Two of the six commission members were not in attendance. Of those that were in attendance one was originally against the proposal, but later flipped. So, all four were in support of further study with one ready to approve and two only going as far as sending it to study with one leaning to approve.

More later. The parking issues at the center apparently has been going on for a while, even before Tesla got there.

Stay tuned.

So basically they punted. Sounds like they are telling the applicant-owner to work things out with the other two owners.

 

[AEdennis]

So basically they punted. Sounds like they are telling the applicant-owner to work things out with the other two owners.

That's the other thing... down to one other owner to convince. (The one for Dollar Tree/Ross). The owner of The Shops filed support before the meeting.

 

[Economite]

That's the other thing... down to one other owner to convince. (The one for Dollar Tree/Ross). The owner of The Shops filed support before the meeting.

And that's really the sticking point. A planning commission is unlikely to be willing to approve this sort of thing while there is still an open objection from one of the other owners. Cities dislike getting pulled into ownership squabbles.